Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 05:01:25PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > * Didier 'OdyX' Raboud (o...@debian.org) [150831 11:23]: > > Le lundi, 31 août 2015, 11.04:59 Axel Beckert a écrit : > > > > As far as I understand this would mean proposing an alternative choice > > > for the voter. In that case,

Re: Strategic Voting Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

> "Kurt" == Kurt Roeckx writes: Kurt> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 04:49:08PM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: Kurt> One of the problems, and I consider that to be the most Kurt> important one, is about the stratigic vote that you can do. Kurt> For example,

Re: Strategic Voting Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 02:43:04PM +, Sam Hartman wrote: > Kurt> The solution to this problem is moving the majority check > Kurt> later in the process, so that option B would have been dropped > Kurt> first. If they did this stratigic voting in that case both > Kurt> options

Re: Strategic Voting Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 02:43:04PM +, Sam Hartman wrote: > In conclusion, endless discussion is not a win. And I think this > strategic voting fix may bring us there. If I were to put together an > amendment that fixed the strictly greater issue but did not tackle the > strategic voting

Re: In plain English please?! Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

Kurt Roeckx writes: > The solution to this problem is moving the majority check later > in the process, so that option B would have been dropped first. > If they did this stratigic voting in that case both options would > have been dropped. Interesting -- one thought: haven't

Re: In plain English please?! Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 09:47:47AM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote: > Kurt Roeckx writes: > > > The solution to this problem is moving the majority check later > > in the process, so that option B would have been dropped first. > > If they did this stratigic voting in that case both

Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 * Didier 'OdyX' Raboud (o...@debian.org) [150831 11:23]: > Le lundi, 31 août 2015, 11.04:59 Axel Beckert a écrit : > > As far as I understand this would mean proposing an alternative choice > > for the voter. In that case, the damage is already done

In plain English please?! Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

Hello, On 31 August 2015 at 08:06, Kurt Roeckx - Debian Project Secretary wrote: > Hi, > > A new GR has been started to update the Standard Resolution > Procedure. Details about it can be found on: > https://www.debian.org/vote/2015/vote_002 > I'm failing to understand

Re: In plain English please?! Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > On 31 August 2015 at 08:06, Kurt Roeckx - Debian Project Secretary > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > A new GR has been started to update the Standard Resolution > > Procedure. Details about it can be found on: > >

Re: In plain English please?! Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

Dimitri John Ledkov writes: > I'm failing to understand the current situation, nor proposed changes. > Can someone please give a plain English explanation and/or examples? > E.g. committee of size N is voting on an issue I which happens to be > overriding developer. The votes

Re: In plain English please?! Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

Russ Allbery writes: > Dimitri John Ledkov writes: >> I'm failing to understand the current situation, nor proposed changes. >> Can someone please give a plain English explanation and/or examples? >> E.g. committee of size N is voting on an issue I which

Re: In plain English please?! Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 04:49:08PM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > Hello, > > On 31 August 2015 at 08:06, Kurt Roeckx - Debian Project Secretary > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > A new GR has been started to update the Standard Resolution > > Procedure. Details about it can be

Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

Hi Axel, (CC'ing aba, as GR proposer). Le lundi, 31 août 2015, 10.26:18 Axel Beckert a écrit : > Kurt Roeckx - Debian Project Secretary wrote: > > https://www.debian.org/vote/2015/vote_002 > > Please either do not use the word combination "fencepost bug" at all > or explain its meaning. These

Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

Hi, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: > Le lundi, 31 août 2015, 10.26:18 Axel Beckert a écrit : > > Kurt Roeckx - Debian Project Secretary wrote: > > > https://www.debian.org/vote/2015/vote_002 > > > > Please either do not use the word combination "fencepost bug" at all > > or explain its meaning. >

Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

also sprach Axel Beckert [2015-08-31 10:26 +0200]: > Please either do not use the word combination "fencepost bug" at all > or explain its meaning. > > As far as I could find out it refers to a political joke (!) in the > USA comparing a "fencepost turtle" to e.g. George W. Bush

Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

Hi, Kurt Roeckx - Debian Project Secretary wrote: > https://www.debian.org/vote/2015/vote_002 Please either do not use the word combination "fencepost bug" at all or explain its meaning. As far as I could find out it refers to a political joke (!) in the USA comparing a "fencepost turtle" to

Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

Andreas: GR amendment proposal below. Le lundi, 31 août 2015, 11.04:59 Axel Beckert a écrit : > I would have preferred if "off-by-one" would have been used instead of > "fencepost" as in the subject of the original GR proposal. That term > is later missing in the announcement by Kurt as well as

Re: General resolution: Changes to the Standard Resolution Procedure

Hi Didier, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: > Le lundi, 31 août 2015, 11.04:59 Axel Beckert a écrit : > > I would have preferred if "off-by-one" would have been used instead of > > "fencepost" as in the subject of the original GR proposal. That term > > is later missing in the announcement by Kurt as