On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 02:34:28PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote: > Le lundi 05 avril 2021 à 14:07:13+0200, Marc Haber a écrit : > > On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 12:15:25PM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote: > > > Making a system more complicated to try and address a specific > > > deficiency rarely reduces its attack surface. In this case, our voting > > > system involves multiple levels (quorum, majority, ranking resolution) > > > each with its own criteria and threshold and (due to Arrow's Theorem) > > > unavoidable flaws, and every feature of this sort increases the > > > system's attack surface to both strategic voting and to just plain > > > doing the wrong thing given honest votes. Moving FD around in the > > > ordering is an example of this, as is a quorum boycott. > > > > I have been a DD for nearly 20 years and I have not yet understood how > > we vote. Before I joined Debian, I thought that the way Germany votes > > for the Bundestag is a complex method. > > > > Greetings > > It's probably because I'm a mathematician, but I really enjoy our voting > system, despite it also having flaws.
For me it is also mostly mathematical curiosity, and there is no situation in real-life elections where it would be relevant. Voting methods like Condorcet try to solve problems in single-round first-past-the-post systems with more than 2 candidates that are common in the UK and some former British colonies. For people living in a country like Germany where the shares of representation in parliament are based on the nationwide vote, Debian is usually the first and only contact with anything like Condorcet. cu Adrian
