2025年7月28日(月) 23:31 Larry Garfield :
>
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2025, at 3:38 AM, Ken Guest wrote:
> > People can just abstain by not voting anyway - I really don't see what
> > adding this would give us.
>
> There are a couple of recent RFCs, including some in voting now, where I
> don't know enough abo
On Sun, Jul 27, 2025, at 8:09 AM, Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 7/24/25 15:42, Larry Garfield wrote:
>> Just to clarify here, Single Transferable Vote and Ranked Choice Voting are
>> the same thing. I think it's just another Ameircan-vs-British English
>> question. :-)
>
> My understanding is
On Mon, Jul 28, 2025, at 3:38 AM, Ken Guest wrote:
> People can just abstain by not voting anyway - I really don't see what
> adding this would give us.
There are a couple of recent RFCs, including some in voting now, where I don't
know enough about the subject to have an opinion, but I do want
People can just abstain by not voting anyway - I really don't see what
adding this would give us.
On Sun, 27 Jul 2025 at 14:45, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On 27 July 2025 14:09:50 BST, "Tim Düsterhus" wrote:
> >Hi
> >
> >On 7/24/25 15:42, Larry Garfield wrote:
> >> Just to clarify here, Single Tra
On 27 July 2025 14:09:50 BST, "Tim Düsterhus" wrote:
>Hi
>
>On 7/24/25 15:42, Larry Garfield wrote:
>> Just to clarify here, Single Transferable Vote and Ranked Choice Voting are
>> the same thing. I think it's just another Ameircan-vs-British English
>> question. :-)
>
>My understanding is tha
Hi
On 7/24/25 15:42, Larry Garfield wrote:
Just to clarify here, Single Transferable Vote and Ranked Choice Voting are the
same thing. I think it's just another Ameircan-vs-British English question. :-)
My understanding is that “Ranked Choice Voting” is a generic term of
which “Single Trans
On Thu, Jul 24, 2025, at 4:28 AM, Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> Hi
>
> Am 2025-07-23 17:34, schrieb Andreas Heigl:
>> As you point out, the abstain alone solves a me "problem". Changing the
>> process just for that, seems overkill to me.
>
> Requiring an "Abstain" option in the voting widget is a simple
On Thu, Jul 24, 2025, at 4:13 AM, Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> Hi
>
> Am 2025-07-23 16:05, schrieb Larry Garfield:
>> The only thing I'd add is that in the case of multi-option secondary
>> votes, STV/RCV also be explicitly allowed. (Rank first, second, third,
>> etc.). (I'm aware the mechanism for S
Hi
Am 2025-07-23 17:34, schrieb Andreas Heigl:
As you point out, the abstain alone solves a me "problem". Changing the
process just for that, seems overkill to me.
Requiring an "Abstain" option in the voting widget is a simple change to
the process. It does not require any additional effort f
Hi
Am 2025-07-23 16:05, schrieb Larry Garfield:
The only thing I'd add is that in the case of multi-option secondary
votes, STV/RCV also be explicitly allowed. (Rank first, second, third,
etc.). (I'm aware the mechanism for STV is kinda clunky on the wiki
right now, but we know how to make i
Hey
Am 23.07.25 um 17:21 schrieb Volker Dusch:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 4:30 PM Andreas Heigl wrote:
Adding an Abstain in combination with one of these changes
* Introducing a certain amount of minimum votes (including abstains)
* Connecting voting karma to actual particiation in votes
sound
On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 4:30 PM Andreas Heigl wrote:
> Adding an Abstain in combination with one of these changes
>
> * Introducing a certain amount of minimum votes (including abstains)
> * Connecting voting karma to actual particiation in votes
>
> sounds very reasonable and worthwile in my opi
Hey
Am 23.07.25 um 00:03 schrieb Tim Düsterhus:
Hi
Adding an "Abstain" option to RFCs was an idea that floated around
multiple times in the past and it now came up again as part of (more
than) one of the RFCs that recently went to vote. I've therefore finally
written up a policy RFC to add s
On Tue, Jul 22, 2025, at 5:03 PM, Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> Hi
>
> Adding an "Abstain" option to RFCs was an idea that floated around
> multiple times in the past and it now came up again as part of (more
> than) one of the RFCs that recently went to vote. I've therefore finally
> written up a poli
Hi
Adding an "Abstain" option to RFCs was an idea that floated around
multiple times in the past and it now came up again as part of (more
than) one of the RFCs that recently went to vote. I've therefore finally
written up a policy RFC to add such an option. As part of doing that I
have also
15 matches
Mail list logo
