On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 11:53:38PM +0100, Karsten Merker wrote: > > So while I agree there might be possible improvements in how the vote goes, > > I > > don't think just deleting that one sentence is it. > > I beg to differ :). I have taken a look at Ian's proposal with > using sqrt(people allowed to vote) instead of a fixed ratio of > 50%. That doesn't solve the general underlying problem of "not > voting" generating a bias against the appealer, but it makes such > a negative effect less likely, so I would consider this at least > a lot better than a fixed 50% ratio.
The problem with deleting the sentence is that only 1 person voting can decide on the result. You really want to have a minimum of people voting. And once you introduce some kind of quorum, there is always a (small) advantage for the status quo, but it assumes they organize themselves to try and take advantage of it. Kurt
