2 ms·

Voting procedure is documented here [0] section A.6 I agree that it would be nice to include the total number of ballots in the final results, but that isn't r

Voting procedure is documented here [0] section A.6 I agree that it would be nice to include the total number of ballots in the final results, but that isn't really relevant to the results. Each voter submits a ranked choice vote ballot. The table indicates that 113 ballots prefer option 1 over option 2, whicl 137 ballot prefer option 2 over option 1. The majority calculation is a bit weird. All Debian votes include default option, in this case that is option 8, "Further Discussion". Preferring an option over the default is seen as a general "approval" vote, while prefering the default is considered "disapproval". The "majority" votes looks at the ratio between approval and disapproval. For instance, option 1 had 203 votes to apporove and 186 votes to disaprove, giving it a ratio of 203/186 = 1.09 Voters are not required to vote on all options. Excluding private votes, they release every individual vote once voting is closed, so you can see how many abstensions an indidual option received; but it appears that this has not been released yet. [0] https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution

salawat 6y ago
That'd be it. There was an entire dimension going on there I was unaware of the ranked choice. I was thinking FPTP. Thank you for the reference. So there is no general 'nay' vote on a proposal except to vote it at a lower rank than the default option? I think I get it now. I'm actually kind of glad most people don't want to make any statement at all. It isn't really something tht should matter. Beyond my vocal opposition to lending any credibility to the original smear with regards to RMS, I'm kind of in the camp we should all just move on. Most of FSF's insiders that have a problem with him have more than enough points actually relevant to his missing opportunities to make a worthwhile push at ousting him without relying on controversy and lies, but they'd also have to defend it from an equal playing field then. LLVM, GPL issues, etc... Though even looking into the LLVM controversy, I can still see the wisdom in not accepting it and keeping GCC monolithic after having come across a few oldtimers who were there back when proprietary everything was the norm. If someone is to be dismissed, let it be on technical merits. Not some tabloid smear.

salawat 6y ago

That'd be it. There was an entire dimension going on there I was unaware of the ranked choice. I was thinking FPTP. Thank you for the reference. So there is no general 'nay' vote on a proposal except to vote it at a lower rank than the default option? I think I get it now. I'm actually kind of glad most people don't want to make any statement at all. It isn't really something tht should matter. Beyond my vocal opposition to lending any credibility to the original smear with regards to RMS, I'm kind of in the camp we should all just move on. Most of FSF's insiders that have a problem with him have more than enough points actually relevant to his missing opportunities to make a worthwhile push at ousting him without relying on controversy and lies, but they'd also have to defend it from an equal playing field then. LLVM, GPL issues, etc... Though even looking into the LLVM controversy, I can still see the wisdom in not accepting it and keeping GCC monolithic after having come across a few oldtimers who were there back when proprietary everything was the norm. If someone is to be dismissed, let it be on technical merits. Not some tabloid smear.