I see that the PEP 8001 is still being updated (voting method). Should we still expect new changes before the vote starts?
I don't detect any groundswell of opposition anymore now that the voting method changed.
I'm unhappy with the " Further discussion" choice. We have a governance crisis. Many people would like to see it resolved as soon as possible, I don't see the ability to vote for " Further discussion" as a way to resolve this crisis.
There are 6 proposed governance PEPs (maybe 7? ;-)). I don't expect that everybody will agree on everything in a PEP, but everybody should be at least able to order them to vote, no? If no, well, maybe don't vote?
Le sam. 3 nov. 2018 à 04:24, Tim Peters email@example.com a écrit :
Nevertheless, I probably won't vote - I object to public ballots on principle.
I'm not surprised that someone doesn't like one part of the PEP 8001. But well, we need to move on and take a decision...
"Pure Condorcet" is close to trivial to tally: there is a Condorcet winner, or there isn't. I wouldn't even bother to write code to figure it out. For example, write a simple script to convert each ballot to a single line for the following web page, paste the ballots into the text box, and click the "Calculate all winners" button:
Yes, I'm asking for such script. I didn't say that it would be overcomplicated.
The PEP 8001 is not trivial, it expects a specific format:
**DO NOT LEAVE ANY BRACKETS BLANK!** **DO NOT REPEAT A RANKING/NUMBER!**
Maybe it would help to have a script to validate my own vote? (Also ensure that all choices are present?)
The result page will tell you whether or not a Condorcet winner exists. As a bonus, it will also tell you who the winner would be under 15 different ranked-ballot scoring methods. Which may be handy to know in the unlikely case there isn't a Condorcet winner. For example, if "Schulze" and "Hare" (which was called "IRV" in the previous PEP iteration) both pick the same winner then, I bet most people would say "ah, good enough".
Hum, it seems like you are unhappy with the chosen voting method. Again, we have to move on and take a decision. We cannot discuss voting methods forever, and there is no perfect voting methods. Only tradeoffs. I looked at the length of the discussion, and I understood that everybody had the opportunity to express their opinion, and the discussion gone deeply in voting methods, as Carol, I was impressed by the level of the discussion :-)