Simon Wilkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 20 Jul 2008, at 22:09, Jeffrey Altman wrote: >>> The vote-taker should, around the same time nominations start, post >>> a list of the eligible voters. >> >> I would feel uncomfortable defining participation. Lurkers play an >> important role in the >> community even if they are not frequently published documents or >> even commenting >> on them. Voting for the leadership in itself is an important >> aspect of community >> participation. > > Indeed. However, having a low bar to eligibility raises the spectre > of vote-packing, where a large number of addresses join the list in > the run up to an election purely to vote for a particular candidate. > I'm not sure how we can avoid this, with any method for determining > elegibility. Personally, I think that we're a sufficiently small > community that we don't have to worry about these kind of attacks at > the moment - if we grow to a scale where this is a problem, then > hopefully we can evolve new systems as we grow.
Why not simply require voters to be on the list some period of time before any vote actually occurs? Like a month? Or two months? Or one week preceding the first announcement about the vote? <<CDC _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://michigan-openafs-lists.central.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
