[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bpfk] Vote proxying?



Robert LeChevalier, On 22/05/2014 20:13:
On 5/22/2014 12:59 PM, And Rosta wrote:
John Cowan, On 20/05/2014 17:40:
Is it legitimate to proxy one's vote on bpfk matters?

The LLG has traditionally accepted them, and the BPFK is a committee
of the LLG, formally speaking, so I see no reason why not.

John Cowan, LLG parliamentarian

In that case, I proxy mine to Xorxes. Experience has shown me that even
in the rare cases where I don't agree with him from the outset, I soon
come to realize that he was right after all.

I'd also like to point out that if enough bpfk members did likewise, the
bpfk business could be zipped through without unnecessary delay and
debate. Either decisions could simply be referred to Xorxes or else we
could calculate how many Nays it takes to block a consensus and begin by
counting contraxorxesian votes; only if there were sufficient
contraxorxesian votes to block a consensus would it be necessary to
struggle to find some other solution.

Since having enough votes hasn't ever been a problem, this is not an
issue. When it gets to the final consensus decision, probably the
votes that will count will be the votes of people that actually
reviewed the final baseline. A proxy pretty much is an admission that
you didn't. So why should your vote count?

Well that's why I asked the question in the first place, without presuming in advance the answer John gave. And I thought my subsequent explanation had already answered the question you pose: in the years when I was most involved with Lojban (which was after John W C had taken a backseat after CLL completion and before the arrival of clever young kids like Selpahi), I came to understand that Xorxes's views were sounder than mine and mine were sounder than those of everyone else who was active in those years. This is exactly the sort of condition under which proxying is the Right (= most responsible) Thing (google "liquid democracy" and "delegative democracy").

I am, by the way, assuming that we are collectively seeking the best outcome for Lojban as consensually conceived of by the Lojbo community. My present involvement here is largely altruistic, born of goodwill and immensely high regard for some jbopre, and I have long been resigned to the fact that Lojban will never metamorphosize into the language I'd like it to have been (namely, a true loglang with a proselytizing community of users).

--And.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.