Re: Number of options

Antonio Terceiro <[email protected]> Thu, 13 Aug 2026 07:41:26 -0300

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.debian.devel.vote
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

[thanks to Kurt for keeping up with this]

On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 08:04:21AM +0800, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> We currently have 7 options on the website and NoTA, so 8 on the
> ballot. There are 2 other recent options with some seconds, possibly
> creating 10 options. 

This is ridiculous, and means that even people who actually agree are
talking past each other. There are only 2 options: we either a) ban
LLM-assisted contributions completely, or b) tolerate LLM-assisted
contributions under a set of constraints.

I understand that Condorcet voting is supposed to be robust in the face
of multiple options, but I cannot wrap my mind around having 10
different options for this issue, because that's a fantasy, product of
our individualist decision-making method. "Oh look, this is mostly what
I think, but is missing a few bits here and there. I will make my own
then".

We are in the eye of the tornado and won't be able or redefine our
process here and now, so I don't expect to influence the current vote.
But we would need a process by which we can identify clear, distinct
directions for votes, and have the texts to be voted on built
collectively, to avoid this insanity.

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)