Discuss mailing list

[Sebastian Makowiecki <soocki AT mailbox.org>]

The validity of a proposal is determined by the unusual amount of spoiled ballots - and that's the whole point of counting and documenting such votes.

But you are right, this is a matter of personal opinion/beliefs on what is right an what isn't.

Obviously the whole time we were not on the same page discussing the matter of spoiled ballots and to some it might have appeared like arguing over nothing (aka trolling etc.).

Once again consensus might be hard to reach.

~ 
Sebastian Makowiecki

On 16 August 2018 17:52:35 GMT+01:00, Al Beano <albino AT autistici.org> wrote:

Obviously there is no objective answer to your question, it's just a 
matter of opinion, but I do not think that spoiled ballots need to have 
any formal impact at all.

Under the rules I have put forward, voters are clear on where they 
stand: if they believe the motion is invalid, they can vote against it.

However, your quote concerns the validity of a vote - what determines 
this? I was under the impression that an invalid vote is a vote which 
violates the rules in some way. Under my proposal, such a vote would 
have no effect whatsoever.

I know this is a bit vague but I hope it answers your question somewhat.

albino

On 16/08/18 17:45, Sebastian Makowiecki wrote:

Isn't the point or spoiled ballots to have an impact if enough invalid
votes are cast? Isn't this the whole point of the ongoing discussion?
Now it's clear to me we are not all on the same page.

The way I understood it the rule such as (or similar):

”The validity of a vote may be questioned if there is an unusually
high proportion of spoiled votes."

should apply.

The above is an indirect quote from wikipedia article
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoilt_vote



~
Sebastian Makowiecki

On 16 August 2018 17:01:14 GMT+01:00, Al Beano <albino AT autistici.org>
wrote:

Voting starts: 2018-08-16 16:00 UTC
Voting ends: 2018-08-23 16:00 UTC

The quality of discourse on this list recently has been extremely poor,
and although I am loath to introduce yet another bureaucratic vote, I
think that a standard, agreed upon set of voting rules would go some way
towards improving things here.

I started a discussion about this some weeks ago
(https://lists.opennicproject.org/sympa/arc/discuss/2018-07/msg00113.html)
<https://lists.opennicproject.org/sympa/arc/discuss/2018-07/msg00113.html%29>
and I am now bringing this to a vote.

1. Formal votes on proposals submitted to the mailing list will have
three possible responses: yes, no and spoiled ballot/abstention.
2. Responses which clearly contain "YES", "AYE" or words to that effect
will be considered "yes" votes.
3. Responses which clearly contain "NO", "NAY" or words to that effect
will be considered "no" votes.
4. All other responses will be considered abstentions from voting and
counted as such.
5. Motions will pass with a simple majority of all yes/no votes.
Abstentions do not affect the outcome in any way. They are informational.
6. In the event of a tie, the status quo will be preserved.
7. This proposal will govern all votes submitted after it passes.

This proposal only governs *formal* votes - that is, votes which will
directly affect the way OpenNIC runs. If members want to use a different
method to gauge the membership's opinion, for example to allow more than
two outcomes in a vote, they are still able to do that in any way they
want. If they want to make a formal change to the rules after that, they
would have to run a vote in compliance with the rules above.

Obviously, my vote for this is YES.

albino




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