On Tue, 13 May 2003 03:15:01 -0400, Anthony DeRobertis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> On Monday, May 12, 2003, at 06:52 PM, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> After re-reading the draft (prompted by Branden on IRC), I think I
>> don't know how to define "when the vote is no longer in doubt",
>> since people can always revote.
> Well, the current draft says "In this context, we ignore the
> possibility that people might want to change their vote."
Is that a reasonable statement?
>>
>> Say, with 1000 voters, on day 1, 800 people voted option A over
>> option B,
> According to the current draft, the vote can be closed at this
> point.
Again, that would mean that the voters, though initially
promised a certain amount of time to determine, cast, and change
their vote, would have suddenly had the period reduced; and the
results of the vote would have been different.
The major problem, as I see it, is that we have not yet
conducted enough votes, and on enough different _kinds_ of options,
to convincingly determine what fraction of voters typically change
their minds, and to build a safe buffer in determining when a vote is
not in doubt. Given that, I am not comfortable enshrining our
speculation of the magnitude of this number into the constitution,
which does tend to get writ in stone.
manoj
--
Auction: A gyp off the old block.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
