On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 12:15:25PM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote: > > Making a system more complicated to try and address a specific > deficiency rarely reduces its attack surface. In this case, our voting > system involves multiple levels (quorum, majority, ranking resolution) > each with its own criteria and threshold and (due to Arrow's Theorem) > unavoidable flaws, and every feature of this sort increases the > system's attack surface to both strategic voting and to just plain > doing the wrong thing given honest votes. Moving FD around in the > ordering is an example of this, as is a quorum boycott. > > Since voting systems are necessarily vulnerable (Arrow's Theorem!) our > objective cannot be perfection, but rather good performance under > realistic conditions. >...
Instead of "attack surface" of a complicated system I would be more worried about the problem that a part of our electorate does not understand how to vote in a way that their ballot matches what they want to express. When looking at the tally of the latest systemd vote,[1] there are plenty of votes like 1------- It is obvious what these voters wanted to express, and that their ballot was wrongly filled due to a lack of understanding how our voting system works. > Cheers, > > --Barak. cu Adrian [1] https://www.debian.org/vote/2019/vote_002_tally.txt
