Hi Sam, On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 07:44:02AM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I'd like to ask especially those people whether choice hartmans1 should > be removed from the ballot. Within limits, I think more options is > better, so my general preference would be to keep the option. However > especially if that option is sene as a distraction by the init diversity > proponents, that could be a significant concern. Obviously (lol) my opinion is that having more options that differ only partially on the ballot is a good thing. We have a "cloneproof" preference voting system for a reason, and reducing the number of options leads into its failure modes: - if there are two major camps and a compromise position, the compromise position will win, and everyone will be unhappy - if there are two major camps and an unworkable compromise position, this degrades into first-past-the-post, with an unhappy minority. So what I'd rather see than the removal of options is for people who do not feel 100% represented by the available options to speak up and add another amendment -- even if it's close to an existing one. > At one point Dmitry expressed a preference for removing that option, but > I don't think I've gotten feedback from others who have seconded (or > proposed) the diversity options now on the ballot. In my opinion, option 1 nor 2 are both impractical, so it is good that there have been counterproposals for each of these, and I don't expect either of option 1 and 2 to do well in the election because of this -- especially option 2 feels like a "death of a thousand paper cuts", and as a sysvinit user, I plan to vote that below NOTA, while "systemd only" would certainly be above NOTA for me. That is however only my opinion, and other people might have different interpretations, so I wouldn't remove them as options. Another opinion: the best outcome for this vote would be to have a position on the ballot that has widespread acceptance, so that it is obvious that the actual vote is just a formality to confirm that we want to put this into a press release. If we are unsure what option won before the results are in, then something has already gone massively wrong. Thus: if there is anyone left who would be unhappy with all currently proposed options, they should speak up and propose another. I'm happy to second amendments even for positions I'm not going to vote for, because it is a lot more sensible to debate these things now than grumble about them later. Simon
