Re: Draft: Proposal Alternative: Traning data is not source code

At 2025-05-08T09:52:25-0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I think our voting system deals well with ballot options, so I've
> never bought into the desire to minimize ballot options.

Yes--supposedly, our balloting method, "Cloneproof/SSD" has the (natch)
"cloneproof" property, meaning that a preferred option is not
susceptible to "splitting" among a set of substantially identical
options, as may happen with other ballot methods (routinely in FPTP).

However, I've not seen a mathematical proof of this property, and I
wonder if we have truly tested it.

> I'm absolutely happy to work with Aigars to minimize differences
> between our proposals and to highlight those differences, not out of a
> desire to get a single merged proposal, but out of a desire to be
> clear what we are voting for.

Communicating clearly and candidly to the voter is always laudable.

Regards,
Branden

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=PTrQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----