On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 09:15:09AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote: > On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 07:03:29AM -0800, Robert Woodcock wrote: > > Err, if there are three choices (your proposal, editorial-only, and further > > discussion), and the Condorcet ballots show that more people preferred > > editorial-only over your proposal, doesn't that mean that more people > > preferred editorial-only over your proposal? > The problem is that it may also be the case that more people preferred > Branden's proposal over doing nothing at all, in which case it would be > inappropriately defeated.
No, it wouldn't. If the options are:
Branden's Proposal
Editorial changes only
No changes
and people prefer:
Editorial defeats No by 300:20
Editorial defeats Branden's by 170:150
Branden's defeats No by 170:150
then there's nothing inappropriate about Editorial changes only being what
happens -- the majority of developers think that's the right thing to do.
(Example votes for the above outcome:
[321] x20
[213] x20
[312] x130
[123] x150
)
We've already been over this.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
Australian DMCA (the Digital Agenda Amendments) Under Review!
-- http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/copyright/digitalagenda
pgpe0uNvEzSiq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
