[EM] Poll on voting-systems, to inform voters in upcoming enactment-elections

[Kristofer Munsterhjelm]

On 2024-04-10 01:54, Michael Ossipoff wrote:
> 
> Not sure what KM means by “administer”. Make rules & decisions by 
> decree? Or maybe just be chairperson or facilitator.
> 
> This is a poll, not an organization. It neither has nor needs a charter 
> or officers, including chairperson.
> 
> I proposed a poll because there wasn’t one. I suggested a voting method 
> & nomination & voting periods because those are needed for a poll. But 
> those were suggestions, & were obviously open to discussion.
> 
> I didn’t perceive myself as “administering” the poll, because it didn’t 
> occur to me that any participant should be special, or have unique right 
> to make suggestions or ask questions.

I mean it in the same sense you did: that your proposals carry weight 
unless someone else thinks otherwise.[1]

As an example: you proposed that the ballots be ranked and Approval. If 
nobody else were to object, they probably *would* be ranked and Approval.

That's all it is. The decentralized nature of the list of course means 
that anybody can do anything. Your election result resolved by Schulze 
has no formal power; anybody could use Plurality or Borda if they so want.

Nor do my suggestions have any force of decree either. They're just 
given some weight by default from that some members support me making 
such suggestions.

I read rb-j's post as basically "since MO is blocking so many people, 
could you do what he's doing instead?". Nothing more formal than that.

-km

[1] And that I would do the pure mechanical things (like gathering up 
the votes, making a post listing them all, as well as the rbvote 
results, Condorcet matrix, etc.)