----- "Steve Langasek" <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, I agree that supermajority requirements are a bad idea in > general.
To understand the need for a supermajority all you have to do is look at American politics. A supermajority insures that a razor thin majority can't end up doing something radically disagreeable to almost half the population. With a three to one supermajority you insure that only a true minority of the project would be in disagreement with whatever action is under consideration. I do agree that we need clarification around votes where choices have varying consensus requirements. It seems like they may malfunction but I can't really visualize all the ways that might happen. Is there a mathematician in the house? -- Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com [email protected] - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
