Matthias Urlichs <sm...@smurf.noris.de> writes: > Steve Langasek: >> "Obvious", but wrong. We use Condorcet to enable fully expressing our >> preferences among all the ballot options, not just our first-choice >> preference. The chair using a casting vote between two tied options >> (or three, which is the problematic case) is expressing a preference >> for one over the other; if such a preference exists, the non-strategic >> vote is to express this same preference in the original ballot.
> The chair might desire to use their casting vote to select the more > popular | less controversial | more- (or less-)vocally-supported option, > as opposed to their personal opinion | preference. Can I suggest that this discussion may be better placed in debian-project? The procedural issue is really a concern for the project as a whole, and any changes would be constitutional changes and would have to go through the project as a whole. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
