Anthony DiPierro wrote:
On 11/20/05, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Sam Korn wrote:
On 11/20/05, Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca wrote:
They should be voting "merge and delete", then. If they just vote "merge" then calling that a delete vote is itself putting words into mouths, whereas keeping is the default.
Merge and delete is not a possible vote. People should not have to vote in such a specific way to prevent vote-hijacking.
People can vote any way they want. If people vote that way then it's possible. I don't know anything about the "vote-hijacking" jargon that you are trying to introduce.
The suggestion to merge is a vestige from a time when VfD was about reaching consensus about what to do rather than about voting and counting votes.
A whiff of nostalgia!
If you want to count votes, then I guess you could take two positions. The first, which I'll call the Al Gore position, is to try to figure out whether the voter intended the merge vote to mean delete or not delete. The second, which I'll call the George W. Bush position, is to throw out the vote as invalid.
Just choose the one which best achieves your goals. ;-)
Ec