Discuss mailing list

[Sebastian Makowiecki <soocki AT mailbox.org>]

DanQ: Just as a side note/comment: my intensions were (not first nor the last time) misunderstood. I was by no means 'angry/dissatisfied' when I was  initially casting my invalid vote. Oh, sweet ignorance!

~ Sebastian Makowiecki

On Sat, 21 Jul, 2018 at 2:43 AM, Daniel Quintiliani <danq AT runbox.com> wrote:

Sorry, must've missed that. That's why we have discussion threads with drafts :) (H) 1 week (I) I vote against this change in policy. -- -Dan Q On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 18:38:55 -0700, <vv AT cgs.pw> wrote:

How come one week is not on there? ~ Ole On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 21:32:29 -0400 (EDT) "Daniel Quintiliani" <danq AT runbox.com> wrote: > Here is a proposed draft (note how I readded suggested > months, and how I changed to January, as February is a > bit too far): > > -- > > The first round: > > Vote up to 8 times in order of preference. In each round, > an option may be chosen only once. The option with the > least number of votes shall be removed from the upcoming > round. All items with 0 votes shall be removed from the > upcoming round. > > Previously failed proposals to create OpenNIC TLDs, and > all identical duplicates of proposals which have failed > to pass, shall not be introduced for another: > > (A) 12 months > (B) 9 months > (C) 8 months > (D) 6 months > (E) 4 months > (F) 3 months > (G) 1 month > (H) I vote against this change in policy. > > This proposal, if passed, shall take effect on January 1, > 2019, at 00:00 UTC. > > -- > > The second round, in the example of three options are > removed, will be: > > Vote up to 5 times in order of preference. In each round, > an option may be chosen only once. The option with the > least number of votes shall be removed from the upcoming > round. > > -- > > When there are only two options left: > > Please vote only once from the following two options: > > -- > > -Dan Q > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 20:15:04 -0400 (EDT), "Daniel > Quintiliani" <danq AT runbox.com> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > A number of people were unhappy with the recent vote on > > reintroduction of proposals. Many had proposals such as > > multiple rounds of voting, which were very confusing. I > > attempted to simplify things by taking only multiples > > of 3 up to 12, 1 month, and no change. There were also > > two protest votes by people who wanted other amounts of > > months and were not willing to compromise. > > > > In major elections in my country, you start out with > > many choices between candidates, who drop out until one > > candidate from each party remains, and then one wins > > the election. The only exception to that is in the > > extremely rare case when a third-party candidate is > > relevant. Third party candidates serve no purpose but > > to (1) encourage the major party canidates to adopt > > their views and/or (2) split the vote and help the > > other side win. > > > > I assumed that with this vote, people would rally > > behind a single option as time went on. This did not > > happen, as angry voters cast protest votes such as > > "C->D 4 months" and "<invalid>" > > > > Shortly after I put the issue to vote, I was discussing > > with vvande and others on Discord a European style of > > voting called "instant runoff voting" in which there's > > less of a need to compromise. In this case, one votes > > for as many of the options as they choose, in order of > > preference. There are multiple rounds of voting in this > > case, in which the each round would remove the last > > place option, until only one option remains. If any > > option has zero votes in a round, they would also be > > removed. > > > > Votes are then counted in this manner: > > > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:IRV_counting_flowchart.svg > > > > I didn't want to tamper with the election so I stayed > > quiet until it ended, with plans to reintroduce with > > instant runoff voting if no changes were made. > > > > So as no changes have been made, I will use this same > > vote, instant-runoff voting, this time with 4 and 8 > > months added back to the choices, and with the > > effective date pushed ahead to February 2019. The > > initial vote will start on the 24th and last through > > the 31st. > > > > In addition to the original proposal, we have had > > proposals such as .free/.libre/.liber/etc which were > > not limited to yea/nay. Thus unless the .free vote and > > others are illegitimate, there is nothing prohibiting > > instant runoff voting, and this proposal can be brought > > to a vote. > > > > Any comments before the voting starts should go in this > > thread. > > > > -- > > > > -Dan Q > > > > > > -------- > > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. > > You may unsubscribe by emailing > > discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org > > -------- You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org

-------- You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org