Discuss mailing list

["Daniel Quintiliani" <danq AT runbox.com>]

That's great, thank you.

Today I remembered though, for when you put together #4, if you remember when 
we standardized our voting and discussion system, it was a line-item yea/nay 
for 6 votes, and only 3 passed. I think we should still allow for something 
like that.

--

-Dan Q


On Sat, 4 Aug 2018 15:34:16 -0500, Jonah Aragon <jonah AT opennic.org> wrote:

> If you wish to introduce points 1 and 2 yourself first I’ll wait to propose 
> #4 later.
> 
> Jonah
> 
> > On Aug 4, 2018, at 9:25 AM, Daniel Quintiliani <danq AT runbox.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Jonah, would you mind if when I introduced this, I did not include #3 or 
> > #4 and changed the title to "[VOTE] Invalidate previous vote"? It seems 
> > that OpenNIC people are divided on yea/nay right now, while it's 
> > important to get rid of the confusion over those two votes which, 
> > according to instant runoff voting, technically did pass with 1 week, 
> > even though we were all confused. You can then introduce #4 (which 
> > implies #3) as a separate proposal afterward. Sound OK?
> > 
> > --
> > 
> > -Dan Q
> > 
> > 
> > On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 16:35:22 +0200, Amunak <amunak AT amunak.net> wrote:
> > 
> >> This is still stupid, reactionary and unnecessary.
> >> 
> >> Like, there's never been a major issue with any kind of voting before,
> >> and why'd you ban a decent system just because of one poor 
> >> implementation?
> >> 
> >> Also, why do you feel like it's necessary to "nullify" a vote that has
> >> not passed anyway?
> >> 
> >> If anything, there should be a requirement where a *final* vote has to
> >> be a yes/no (as in, implement or do not implement), but there should be
> >> no restriction on previous discussion or non-final votes. Voting in
> >> general is a pretty good mechanism to gauge interest and opinions.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On 01.08.2018 21:29, Daniel Quintiliani wrote:
> >>> Per our discussion in this and other threads about proposals vs. 
> >>> personal attacks and allegations of fraud, I would like to propose the 
> >>> following alternative which does not mention my name or include such 
> >>> allegations and attacks:
> >>> 
> >>> Subject: [VOTE] Invalidate previous vote; eliminate other forms of 
> >>> voting
> >>> 
> >>> 1. The proposal entitled "Reintroduction of past proposals", including 
> >>> all associated votes, (re)counts, and results, is declared null and 
> >>> void.
> >>> 2. The proposal entitled "Reintroduction of past proposals, IR, R1", 
> >>> including all associated votes, (re)counts, and results, is declared 
> >>> null and void.
> >>> 3. The method in which the votes for the above proposals were counted 
> >>> are hereby declared invalid for the above two proposals and shall not 
> >>> be used for future proposals.
> >>> 4. All votes in the future should be a simple “Aye/Yes” vs “Nay/No” 
> >>> style of voting.
> >>> 
> >>> This vote shall be done in "Aye/Yes" and "Nay/No" style.
> >>> 
> >>> These rules shall take effect two days after the votes have been 
> >>> counted and the results have been published to the mailing list.
> >>> 
> >>> ^^ I think it takes care of the actual procedural end of things without 
> >>> accusations or personal attacks against myself. Jonah, will you accept 
> >>> this for the vote, or do you have changes to suggest?
> >>> 
> >>> --
> >>> 
> >>> -Dan Q
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 23:05:03 -0500, Jonah Aragon, OpenNIC Core Team 
> >>> <jonah AT opennic.org> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> Hello,
> >>>> 
> >>>> I would like to invalidate the results of Daniel Q’s previous vote, 
> >>>> which was counted in a manner inconsistent with normal “instant runoff 
> >>>> voting” procedure. As he won’t permit a sane recount by other 
> >>>> community members including myself, the vote and all future related 
> >>>> votes being conducted with the same voting procedure should be 
> >>>> considered misleading and invalid.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Furthermore, I’d like to mandate that all votes in the future should 
> >>>> be a simple “Aye/Yes” vs “Nay/No” style of voting, to avoid any such 
> >>>> confusion again.
> >>>> 
> >>>> This proposal will be voted on as soon as legally permissible.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Jonah
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> --------
> >>>> 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
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --------
> > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> > You may unsubscribe by emailing 
> > discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org