Re: On the firmwares/Lenny vote
* Julien Blache http://blog.technologeek.org/2008/12/14/149: [...] do not vote by ranking all options 1 to 7 [...] With that many options, the votes will end up diluted and who knows what the result will be. [And then he suggests a 312 vote for those who'd agree to it.] Is this really true? I thought our vote methods were robust against stuff like that. If knowledgeable people could comment, I'd be very much interested in a confirmation of Julien's statement, ideally with some kind of explanation. Thanks in advance, -- Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently. -- F. Nietzsche -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: On the firmwares/Lenny vote
Adeodato Simó d...@net.com.org.es wrote: Hi, [And then he suggests a 312 vote for those who'd agree to it.] I explicitly did not include a ballot suggestion in my post, so please don't put words in my mouth :) JB. -- Julien BLACHE - Debian GNU/Linux Developer - jbla...@debian.org Public key available on http://www.jblache.org - KeyID: F5D6 5169 GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: On the firmwares/Lenny vote
On 14/12/08 at 12:40 +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote: * Julien Blache http://blog.technologeek.org/2008/12/14/149: [...] do not vote by ranking all options 1 to 7 [...] With that many options, the votes will end up diluted and who knows what the result will be. [And then he suggests a 312 vote for those who'd agree to it.] Is this really true? I thought our vote methods were robust against stuff like that. If knowledgeable people could comment, I'd be very much interested in a confirmation of Julien's statement, ideally with some kind of explanation. I'm not knowledgeable, but I think that the evaluation happens in two steps: 1) verify that each option defeats FD with its majority requirement, drop the other options 2) determine the outcome using the remaining options I can't see why it would be harmful to vote 7123456, if you really prefer options 2,3,4,5,6 in that order. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: lu...@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: On the firmwares/Lenny vote
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 11:40:56AM +, Adeodato Simó wrote: * Julien Blache http://blog.technologeek.org/2008/12/14/149: [...] do not vote by ranking all options 1 to 7 [...] With that many options, the votes will end up diluted and who knows what the result will be. [And then he suggests a 312 vote for those who'd agree to it.] Is this really true? I thought our vote methods were robust against stuff like that. The problem is, such a strategy works iff everyone votes the same, IOW you eliminate a bunch of options (the one you put the rank '3') and basically let the choice open for the other to the one _other_ people will prefer. IOW, that's a I don't care for options 2 to 6 but I really don't want 1 vote. And that's especially why this vote is horribly broken, we can't vote for _many_ options at the same time, eventually only one is chosen, unless all the options you want to see win have been ranked equally on every single ballot out there. For example, if half of the people vote for option2 and option4 as '1' and other options below, and the other half of voters for option3 and option4 (and everything else below), then option4 passes over option2 and option3. Yay. Our secretary is failing his job. Critically. Note: I'm not saying Julien advocated _this_ vote, I'm explaining what it would mean. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··Omadco...@debian.org OOOhttp://www.madism.org pgpRoUrVT3UvT.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: On the firmwares/Lenny vote
Pierre Habouzit madco...@debian.org wrote: And that's especially why this vote is horribly broken, we can't vote for _many_ options at the same time, eventually only one is chosen, unless all the options you want to see win have been ranked equally on every single ballot out there. I hope Pierre made it clear to everyone here that our voting system only works for reasonable ballots where each option is an alternative to the other options. For anything else, like this ballot, our voting system is totally inadapted and can only lead to complete failure. Our secretary is failing his job. Critically. And, yes, the secretary can twist the ballot to make it even worse, not even talking about the majority requirements. JB. -- Julien BLACHE - Debian GNU/Linux Developer - jbla...@debian.org Public key available on http://www.jblache.org - KeyID: F5D6 5169 GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: On the firmwares/Lenny vote
Lucas Nussbaum lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net wrote: Hi, I can't see why it would be harmful to vote 7123456, if you really prefer options 2,3,4,5,6 in that order. There's no discussion that you should vote that way if you feel that way and understand what you're doing wrt the different, orthogonal options included in this ballot. JB. -- Julien BLACHE - Debian GNU/Linux Developer - jbla...@debian.org Public key available on http://www.jblache.org - KeyID: F5D6 5169 GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: On the firmwares/Lenny vote
Le Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 01:40:19PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit a écrit : The problem is, such a strategy works iff everyone votes the same Hi all, it there a place where we could dump a copy of our ballots so after a few iterations of re-voting many we eventually converge on the same combination, in order to convey the message that they are unsatisfied ? (And by the way, for the readers of Debian Planet, I think that Christian voted 7452136, as in option 5 first, option four second, …, and option 1 last.) Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: On the firmwares/Lenny vote
* Pierre Habouzit [Sun, 14 Dec 2008 13:40:19 +0100]: For example, if half of the people vote for option2 and option4 as '1' and other options below, and the other half of voters for option3 and option4 (and everything else below), then option4 passes over option2 and option3. Yay. Yes, of course. What I'm interested is in the practical differences and implications between 312 and 7123456, eg., which is what Julien was arguing about. -- Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org Listening to: Eric Clapton - Needs his woman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: On the firmwares/Lenny vote
* Julien BLACHE [Sun, 14 Dec 2008 12:52:39 +0100]: [And then he suggests a 312 vote for those who'd agree to it.] I explicitly did not include a ballot suggestion in my post, so please don't put words in my mouth :) Sorry, honest mistake. I intended to put a paraphrased laben on those brackets, but I forgot, I'm sorry. -- Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org Listening to: Eric Clapton - River of tears -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: On the firmwares/Lenny vote
Adeodato Simó d...@net.com.org.es wrote: Hi, I explicitly did not include a ballot suggestion in my post, so please don't put words in my mouth :) Sorry, honest mistake. I intended to put a paraphrased laben on those brackets, but I forgot, I'm sorry. No problem, but you got your paraphrasing wrong, too. I did not write the sensible options needed to be ranked equally *and* first, only that they needed to be ranked equally. Ie voting sensible options/FD/zealot options or FD/sensible options/zealot options I'm emphasizing this now, because voting FD first and everyting else ranked equally below FD doesn't help (that's 221); sensible options need to be ranked higher. I wrote my post carefully because my intent wass not to tell people what they needed to vote, but to highlight *how* (and not *what*) to vote. I felt that given the complexity of this vote, it was important to highlight that, if only to get people to carefully look at how the vote works. JB. -- Julien BLACHE - Debian GNU/Linux Developer - jbla...@debian.org Public key available on http://www.jblache.org - KeyID: F5D6 5169 GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
