Re: GRs, irrelevant amendments, and insincere voting

[Anthony DeRobertis]

On Oct 31, 2003, at 13:10, Branden Robinson wrote:

If it does, and is reasked, what's to stop a group of 6 people[1] from
proposing an "amendment" that guts the original proposal down to 
nothing
but uncontroversial cosmetic alterations?
Does that really hurt?

        Option A: Strike SC 5 (non-free section)
        Option Z: Further discussion
Let's say I'd vote AZ (obviously, I wouldn't really --- IANADD)

Now, some group of six people add in an amendment, so we have:

        Option A: Strike SC 5
        Option B: some random change
        Option Z: Further discussion
Now, maybe, I really like A. But I like B, too. No problem, I propose 
another amendment, and it (of course, we assume B is popular) gets 
seconds --- or maybe even gets accepted by A's sponsors:

        Option A: Strike SC 5
        Option B: some random change
        Option C: Strike SC 5 + some random change
        Option Z: Further discussion
Now, I can sincerely vote CABZ or CBAZ. I argue that anyone who, in 
this ballot, votes BZCA would of voted ZA on the first ballot.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]