Subject:
|
Re: i admit i was wrong
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 16 Aug 1999 01:03:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
184 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, lehman@javanet.com (Todd Lehman) writes:
> [...]
> > > If the community held a vote, and reached a consensus on what to do (via at
> > > least a 2/3 majority), I would honor the community's decision to remove JW's
> > > posting privileges (to whatever groups were decided upon), if it came down
> > > to that. The vote itself (at the discretion of the community) could of
> > > course be further restricted to, say, a 3/4 or 4/5 majority (or higher),
> > > thus making expulsion a bit more difficult.
> >
> > I know you'd honor that. And I respect you for that as benevolent dictator of
> > Lugnetland. IMO 2/3 isn't quite enough and could still likely cause dissention
> > or splintering of a group, while 3/4 is definitely substantial, and achieving
> > 4/5 might require some lobbying though not unjustifiably so. To be nitpicky,
> > how about 5/7? Such a percentage, 71.428571% (decimal repeats), is technically
> > achievable with 4 four people in a group but still leaves a bit more room
> > where larger groups are concerned.
>
> To be perfectly candid, I'm still a tiny bit nervous about 2/3 (66.67%). I
> would have no worries, however, about 4/5 (80%).
I take it back. I just had a short talk with my father about voting ratios,
and there's something important I was overlooking...
2/3 (66.67%) is a good number after all. 5/7 (71.4%) isn't bad either, but
2/3 is much simpler to express, and it has much precedent in governments.
The good part about high numbers like 4/5 is that it's hard to do X. It
takes at least four people in favor of X for every one person not in favor
of X, to make X happen. Sounds great, right? But look at it from the other
way. It takes only one person -not- in favor of X for every four people in
favor of X, -not- to make X happen. In other words, with a 4/5 majority, a
simple *one-fifth* minority can stop something in its tracks. That's too
unstable.
Some numbers in practice:
* It takes a 1/2 majority in the U.S. House of Representatives to impeach a
President. The reverse: All it takes is a 1/2 majority to prevent
impeachment.
* It takes a 2/3 majority in the U.S. Senate to remove the President. The
reverse: All it takes is a 1/3 minority to prevent removal from office.
* It takes a 3/4 majority of U.S. States to throw out the U.S.
Constitution. The reverse: All it takes is a 1/4 minority to prevent
the Constitution from being thrown out.
* It takes a 12/12 majority (unanimous) in a jury to convict someone. The
reverse: It only takes a 1/12 minority to prevent conviction.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: i admit i was wrong
|
| (...) Yes it does though, IMO, I think a slightly greater majority (just under 5% more) is worth considering (and you probly already have so this section is more or less a waste of bandwidth on my part). 2/3 is much simpler to express, but I hafta (...) (25 years ago, 16-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
