[The first time I replied to this message, I forgot to send a
copy to the list]
In the end, it takes a lot to change our constitution and I fail to >see
what
would be gained.
That question is answered at:
http://www.debian.org/~stevegr/voting/
There, I talk about a number of criteria for co
[The first time I replied to this message, I forgot to send a
copy to the list]
>In the end, it takes a lot to change our constitution and I fail to >see
>what
>would be gained.
That question is answered at:
http://www.debian.org/~stevegr/voting/
There, I talk about a number of criteria for c
I could rediscribe the method but I couldn't make changes as large as what
were suggested without going through the formal change process for the
constitution.
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 07:27:43PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > I should point o
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I should point out that leaving this issue unresolved makes it possible for
> people to raise a legitimate challenge to our voting procedure, since the
> present description avails itself of multiple interpretations of the same
> set of ballots.
I a
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 02:58:35PM -0700, Darren O. Benham wrote:
> In the end, it takes a lot to change our constitution and I fail to see what
> would be gained.
Elimination of ambuguity.
Recent events have persuaded me, however, that lots of people like their
ambiguity, even if it ultimately e
I could rediscribe the method but I couldn't make changes as large as what
were suggested without going through the formal change process for the
constitution.
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 07:27:43PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > I should point
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I should point out that leaving this issue unresolved makes it possible for
> people to raise a legitimate challenge to our voting procedure, since the
> present description avails itself of multiple interpretations of the same
> set of ballots.
I
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 02:58:35PM -0700, Darren O. Benham wrote:
> In the end, it takes a lot to change our constitution and I fail to see what
> would be gained.
Elimination of ambuguity.
Recent events have persuaded me, however, that lots of people like their
ambiguity, even if it ultimately
In the end, it takes a lot to change our constitution and I fail to see what
would be gained.
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 01:36:43AM +, MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
>
[snipped an interesting and long discussion on voting methods]
>
> If members of debian want to perfect their voting system,
> then I sug
In the end, it takes a lot to change our constitution and I fail to see what
would be gained.
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 01:36:43AM +, MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
>
[snipped an interesting and long discussion on voting methods]
>
> If members of debian want to perfect their voting system,
> then I su
First, about how to treat short rankings, if you've ranked X
and you haven't ranked Y, then it's reasonable to say that you've
ranked X over Y. I hope that's how that's interpreted in the
debian count rules.
The rank-counting procedure now in use by debian carries out
Condorcet's suggestion that
First, about how to treat short rankings, if you've ranked X
and you haven't ranked Y, then it's reasonable to say that you've
ranked X over Y. I hope that's how that's interpreted in the
debian count rules.
The rank-counting procedure now in use by debian carries out
Condorcet's suggestion that
12 matches
Mail list logo
