Re: [ga] Voting rules, take 4
> I'd like to have this set of rules voted on now.
> If someone wants to introduce instant runoff, so that we can remove the 50%
> requirement, I hope we can discuss that as a separate issue - AFTER getting
> a rule that works for the simplest cases.
My initial response was "sure."
Here are my "second thoughts:"
1. Our mothers taught us to do our best in everything we touch. That must be
We are now building an operating system. We all know that flaws in the code at
this level will be reflected in the applications. We ought to have compelling
reason to justify making the operating system our first deviation from the
default of "best we can do."
2. It will likely take less time and emotional energy to discuss the real
issue--what is the best code--than debating the worth of having such
discussion. In other words, lets discuss the issue and not waste time arguing
whether we are engaged in governance.
3. To only consider one option against the alternative is unfair to the
proposition not on the ballot. Under your proposal, IRV will be considered (if
at all) in a different context with a strong argument against its necessity.
4. And, piece-mealing the process as proposed violates the "rule against
perpetuities" so recently urged. We save nothing by drawing out the process,
only suffer cost.
Therefore, I move to amend Harald's motion to provide for three ballot choices:
a. Harald's motion;
b. Harald's motion, but with IRV instead of the 50% requirement, changing:
"The alternative selected by more than 50% of the cast votes wins."
"Multi-choice votes shall be conducted using Instant Run-off Voting
c. "none of the above."
fn:Eric Weisberg, Gen. Counsel