Re: [Fwd: [ga-full] RE: [ga] Voting rules, take 4]

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Thu, Jun 22, 2000 at 12:49:19PM -0500, Weisberg wrote:
> Kent Crispin wrote:
> 
> < ...I am struck by the utter absurdity of this conversation.
> 
> "Absurdity" is a rather extreme characterization for discussing the process by
> which our decisions are made.

s/extreme/accurate/

>  And, making that characterization is a
> questionable method of analyzing and resolving an issue placed upon the 
> table by an officer of this assembly; about which we are going to vote;  
> and for which there is no default answer.

There is indeed a default answer.  From Harald's original post:

    2/3 majority required to win, since it's a rule introduction.  Does
    this seem uncontroversial? If so - let's vote on it!

> In short, it is demonstratively disruptive.

In my opinion the disruption is from those who wish to endlessly
elaborate because things aren't just perfect.  Harald put a matter on
the table, a matter which had been open for weeks with nary a peep from 
anyone... 

> The real absurdity is demonstrably this:  that one who believes the
> conversation is absurd should participate and try to affect its outcome.

Don't be silly.  I am branding the conversation as absurd precisely
because I would like it to terminate.

> > I know that there are many who would like to see a world government
> > here, but, objectively speaking, the ga is basically an informal mailing
> > list, and a relatively small one at that.  If we were packed in a room
> > almost certainly we would just use a show of hands to vote, with a very
> > simple decision rule to evaluate the results.  Maybe, in extreme
> > circumstances, we might pass a hat around and collect scraps of paper
> > with various people's names on them.
> 
> Either we are here for serious business or we are wasting our time.

Indeed.  Endless debate about process is precisely "wasting time".

[...]

> Therefore, we should do what?

Vote on Harald's proposition.

> There is no process in place.  We are now
> seeking motions and seconds for proposals upon which we may vote.

I move that we vote on Harald's proposal.

> How do you
> suggest we skip that procedure?

How could we skip it? Do what you are doing -- engage in endless
discussions about the perfect voting procedure.

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html