On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 04:58:15PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 12:49:27AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > > One interesting question that arises is whether it would make sense to > > eliminate some of the complexity of the SRP in the case of a two-valued > > ballot (ratify this? [Y/N]). > > Note that we already had this happen in the instance of ratifying the > constitutional amendment that updated the voting system to what it is now. [...] > The options on the ballot were "Clone Proof SSD Condorcet Amendment" > and "Further Discussion". The former required a supermajority to pass, > a quorum was required. CpSSD handled it quite fine.
I should note that such a simple ballot, where one basically votes straight up or down on a proposition, is pretty much the opposite of the scenario I raised in the original message of this subthread. Pointing out how well the system works on a two-option ballot doesn't do very much to rebut my point at all. -- G. Branden Robinson | It's not a matter of alienating Debian GNU/Linux | authors. They have every right to [EMAIL PROTECTED] | license their software however we http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | like. -- Craig Sanders
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
