Well, no one has sponsored my proposal to amend the constitution.
And, no one has issued any other proposals to fix the ambiguities
of the constitution.
I presume that either:
[1] People got tired of reading Anthony's and my discussion on
debian-vote, and stopped paying attention.
[2] My
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 10:29:06AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Actually, since I had disconnected during the long debate that
progressed here, there was a lot of material to cover, and
digest. And I still think I would not be able to defend the method to
someone uninitiated; I
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 10:16:13AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
Well, no one has sponsored my proposal to amend the constitution.
And, no one has issued any other proposals to fix the ambiguities
of the constitution.
I presume that either:
[1] People got tired of reading Anthony's and my
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 01:07:32PM -0500, I wrote:
The current mechanism can be made to ignore circular ties -- essentially,
you have to use A.6(2..4) only when there's a tie among first-preference
options (and A.6(6) when there's an all-around tie). [Also, to properly
handle votes with
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 03:41:21PM -0600, Norman Petry wrote:
... we have formed a joint committee to develop a proposal, which we
will probably present to Debian for internal discussion in about a
month's time (I'm just guessing on the timeframe; we haven't discussed
this).
This looks
1. SIMPLE MAJORITIES SHOULD RESOLVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMBIGUITY: The
I would be reluctant to vote for a proposal that allowed majorities to
decide ambiguity. First, I am concerned that it might be open to
abuse. Secondly, I believe that the policy making process should be
distinct from the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED],
on 18 Dec 2000 10:29:06 -0600,
on Re: What next?,
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
digest. And I still think I would not be able to defend the method to
someone uninitiated; I need to go look for the
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 04:19:52PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
[1] The current constitutional vote tallying mechanism is ambiguous about
what to do for circular ties
...which tend not to come up, haven't so far, and require three or more
options that are all fairly popular to be an issue.
[2]
Well, no one has sponsored my proposal to amend the constitution.
And, no one has issued any other proposals to fix the ambiguities
of the constitution.
I presume that either:
[1] People got tired of reading Anthony's and my discussion on
debian-vote, and stopped paying attention.
[2] My
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 10:16:13AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
The big question is: what should be done, to advance Manoj+Branden's
proposals?
I think Manoj's and my proposals have both expired by now. A quick glance
at my archive of this list seems to indicate that the last time anyone
bothered
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hi,
Raul == Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Raul Well, no one has sponsored my proposal to amend the constitution.
Raul And, no one has issued any other proposals to fix the ambiguities
Raul of the constitution.
Raul The big question is: what
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 10:29:06AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Actually, since I had disconnected during the long debate that
progressed here, there was a lot of material to cover, and
digest. And I still think I would not be able to defend the method to
someone uninitiated; I need
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 10:16:13AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
Well, no one has sponsored my proposal to amend the constitution.
And, no one has issued any other proposals to fix the ambiguities
of the constitution.
I presume that either:
[1] People got tired of reading Anthony's and my
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 03:07:57PM -0500, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
[4] You kept changing it and nobody knew what to actually second!!
That's fair.
Send a big letter, 'THIS IS THE ONE TO SECOND!' or some such, with the
proposals.
Well, at the moment, I'm pretty happy with the one I proposed
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 01:07:32PM -0500, I wrote:
The current mechanism can be made to ignore circular ties -- essentially,
you have to use A.6(2..4) only when there's a tie among first-preference
options (and A.6(6) when there's an all-around tie). [Also, to properly
handle votes with mixed
For the past month, I (and Anthony) have been arguing, on debian-vote,
about voting mechanisms -- to the tune of around 100k of text. I'm
writing this message as a summary, so that it can be referred to in
debian-weekly-news.
That discussion loaded with mistakes, of various kinds -- a
Raul Miller wrote:
Well, no one has sponsored my proposal to amend the constitution.
And, no one has issued any other proposals to fix the ambiguities
of the constitution.
I thought I should mention now that some members of Debian, together with a
few of us from the Election Methods (EM) list,
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 03:41:21PM -0600, Norman Petry wrote:
... we have formed a joint committee to develop a proposal, which we
will probably present to Debian for internal discussion in about a
month's time (I'm just guessing on the timeframe; we haven't discussed
this).
This looks pretty
1. SIMPLE MAJORITIES SHOULD RESOLVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMBIGUITY: The
I would be reluctant to vote for a proposal that allowed majorities to
decide ambiguity. First, I am concerned that it might be open to
abuse. Secondly, I believe that the policy making process should be
distinct from the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED],
on 18 Dec 2000 10:29:06 -0600,
on Re: What next?,
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
digest. And I still think I would not be able to defend the method to
someone uninitiated; I need to go look for the
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 04:19:52PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
[1] The current constitutional vote tallying mechanism is ambiguous about
what to do for circular ties
...which tend not to come up, haven't so far, and require three or more
options that are all fairly popular to be an issue.
[2]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hi,
I second this proposal.
manoj
- --- debian/constitution.txt Tue Sep 14 18:00:00 1999
+++ tmp/constitution.txtMon Dec 18 10:10:18 2000
@@ -162,7 +162,7 @@
This does not apply to decisions which have only become gradually
22 matches
Mail list logo
