7 Aug
2013
7 Aug
'13
4:40 p.m.
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Sam Stuewe <halosghost@archlinux.info> wrote:
On 2013-08-07 11:33, Sam Stuewe wrote:
and non-votes are not the same as "no votes". Perhaps, instead of a super majority, requiring no less than a certain number of no votes would be a good idea. For instance, allowing 50%+1 to pass so long as there are no more than 33% would be a fairly functional model.
To clarify, that would be "so long as there are no more than 33% voting against." This creates an artificial super-majority which still only requiring a simple majority to pass.
All the best,
-Sam
That's a good point, I agree.