Veto vs no was: Re: CFV: New Project: JDK 9

[Magnus Ihse Bursie]

On 2013-10-31 18:04, Andrew wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> On 31/10/2013 9:14 AM, Andrew wrote:
>>
>>>> [5] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#new-project-vote
>>>>
>>> Reading [5], it doesn't seem to be possible to vote no?
>> Sure it is, but it is spelt "veto".
>>
>> David
>>
>>
> They aren't the same thing, plus "Lazy Consensus — There are no vetoes.". [0]
>
> [0] http://openjdk.java.net/bylaws#lazy-consensus

Why don't you read the whole paragraph you're quoting from?

---snip---
*Consensus voting*
These methods are used for decisions that do not require the full 
attention of the set of eligible voters.

In the consensus methods the possible votes are Yes, Veto, and Abstain.

A *Veto* must be accompanied by a justification; a Veto without a 
justification is invalid. If a Veto is raised then the voter who raised 
the veto and those who support the proposed action must work together to 
reach a mutually-agreeable resolution. If a Veto is resolved then the 
voter who raised the Veto must withdraw that vote by explicitly 
abstaining or by casting a Yes vote.

These Bylaws use two methods of consensus voting:

*Lazy Consensus* — There are no vetoes.

*Three-Vote Consensus* — There are no vetoes, and at least three Yes 
votes or else unanimity if there are fewer than three eligible voters.
---snip---

I think it's pretty clear that when doing consensus voting, if you 
disagree you do not vote "no", but "veto". That's kind of the point of 
consensus -- you can't have one person voting "no" and the majority 
voting "yes" and then that single person gets overruled. Then it's not 
consensus, but a majority vote.

Also, I think it's pretty clear, at least in the context of the 
three-vote consensus, that the "there are no vetoes" description on lazy 
consensus is the definition of what's required to consider the proposal 
ratified. The interpretation "lazy consensus is a consensus voting 
method where veto is not allowed" seems quite far-fetched...

So the absence of "no" as a vote is not a bug, it's an explicit feature.

/Magnus