On Mon, 12 May 2003, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> I suggest we strike the clause about the secretary's ability
> to end votes early.
I was wondering about the issue of vote changability. I'm not exactly a
veteran in the voting procedures debate, but for what it's worth, I think
this clause
On Mon, 12 May 2003 19:44:48 -0400, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Mon, May 12, 2003 at 05:52:17PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> 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 ca
On Mon, May 12, 2003 at 05:52:17PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> 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.
Clearly the idea doesn't make sense if everybody change
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> I suggest we strike the clause about the secretary's ability
> to end votes early.
i concur.
-john
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.
Say, with 1000 voters, on day 1, 800 people voted option A
over option B, and 100 people vote option B ov
Hi folks,
We seem to have stalled again. This is the latest copy of the
voting GR I have. I think I have incorporated the latest changes that
we decided upon, please correct me if I missed something.
I really would like to nail this down, and start the 2 week
discussion period
6 matches
Mail list logo