Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:128243
Message-ID: <cf8d6772-bff6-41a8-855e-e89edaf18b25@bastelstu.be>
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2025 15:09:50 +0200
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] "Abstain" voting option for RFCs
To: Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>,
 php internals <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <b0d97beef95862524b329922522bbefe@bastelstu.be>
 <7afc0ac1-3446-459a-a67a-e616afe750f6@app.fastmail.com>
 <da61c5e98ab460211d4e54d7903b2e25@bastelstu.be>
 <c7ddb907-0e7c-4abe-90f9-e28f6cfbaefc@app.fastmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <c7ddb907-0e7c-4abe-90f9-e28f6cfbaefc@app.fastmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: tim@bastelstu.be (=?UTF-8?Q?Tim_D=C3=BCsterhus?=)

Hi

On 7/24/25 15:42, Larry Garfield wrote:
> Just to clarify here, Single Transferable Vote and Ranked Choice Voting are the same thing.  I think it's just another Ameircan-vs-British English question. :-)

My understanding is that “Ranked Choice Voting” is a generic term of 
which “Single Transferable Vote” is a specific implementation. I 
specifically do not want to allow any other implementations than the one 
the PHP project is already comfortable with using.
> How about this, as a following paragraph:
> 
> As an STV example, a secondary vote using STV and having 5 "Foo", 4 "Bar", 8 "Baz", and 9 "Abstain" first-choice votes has no majority, so will go to a second round.  "Bar" will be eliminated and those votes redistributed to second-choice options.  If for example the second round result is 6 "Foo", 9 "Baz", and 11 "Abstain", then Baz will have won as it has a clear majority of non-Abstain votes cast.

That is quite verbose and requires two assumptions to be made, making it 
hard to follow when not already knowing how STV works. I think it will 
confuse more than it helps.

Best regards
Tim Düsterhus