Discuss mailing list

[Amunak <amunak AT amunak.net>]

This is actually a good point. Nothing prevents us from using alternate systems to reach a compromise (in this case the reintroduction period length) - even without a "no" option (or at most in the first round to gather opinions of the other side), and then after reaching it making a proper yes/no vote where you vote for either approving the compromise or not.

On 21.07.2018 2:44, Al Beano wrote:

IR doesn't always return what many people view as the most satisfactory result. In my eyes it's certainly preferable to FPTP, but you can still end up with a result that doesn't represent anyone's first choice.

A simple majority doesn't guarantee that anyone's first choice will be met either, but it does guarantee that a majority of members are happier with the new proposal than are happier without it.

I'd also prefer a system where the proposer is empowered to formulate their proposal in whatever way they think is best - if an informal poll of members shows that they are split between two options, they could introduce compromises - ultimately, their goal is to create a proposal which will pass, so it's in their interest to do this in the most effective way possible while preserving the spirit of what they want to get done.

IR is often talked about in the context of electing _people_ - since we're voting directly for motions and not representatives, we have a lot more flexibility. This keeps the end result simple and decisive. We are a small organisation, after all.

albino

On 21/07/18 01:32, Jonah Aragon wrote:

Can you elaborate on why instant-runoff voting isn’t an acceptable alternative for multiple choice proposals?

Jonah

On Jul 20, 2018, at 7:15 PM, Al Beano <albino AT autistici.org> wrote:

Recent events suggest that we should clarify a set of voting rules.

My view is that all proposals submitted to the ML (or DokuWiki as the case may be) should be subject so a simple yes/no vote, and pass with a majority over 50%. A tie would result in the status quo being preserved. No other options would be allowed.

This system means that all proposals that pass have the full support of the majority of voters. Proposals with more complex implementation details (e.g. the current one re "Reintroduction of past proposals") can be formed however the person writing them wants - including by gathering the thoughts of members using the ML or other means - but they bear no weight until ratified by a simple majority of members.

albino


--------
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