On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 06:08:41PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > couldn't we get cycles using that? Alternatively, we could iteratively > elect: > - winner1: the winner with all candidates > - winner2: the winner with all candidates minus winner1 > - winner3: the winner with all candidates minus [winner1, winner2] > - etc > using the same tally sheet
You can't do that and keep all the 'goodness' of our voting system, because doing that loses the interdependencies of votes. I don't know how to explain it properly :), please see: http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2007/06/msg00318.html > Or, we could elect a list directly (ie each option is a list of people > willing to work together as SC), which would allow to elect a SC which > is actually representative for Debian. This means parties, and I don't see any proof that this would help with being representative? > It's probably better than the first solution, as the first solution isn't > clone-proof: we could have elected n Sams!! ;) There should be some sentence in the constitution that can be interpreted as a rule against cloning... :) -- 2. That which causes joy or happiness. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
