PEP 308: Alternative conditional operator forms

[Laura Creighton]

> Laura Creighton wrote:
> 
> I have no objection to including "don't cares" in the voting process,
> provided it's included in a way such that everyone is satisfied with the
> process.

Well, you are never going to get that; people who think that people
who don't care should get no vote will be opposed to this no matter
what. 

> 
> I was simply pointing out that there are _always_ an implied _huge_
> contingent of "don't cares" in any vote, and so if you include a special
> "abstain" vote, the question boils down to what that should mean in the
> final figures.  The real number of people who don't care will certainly
> be much greater than the number of "abstain" votes that get sent;

So will the real number that are pro, and the real number that are
anti.

> admittedly, in many cases, it might even be much greater than the total
> number of yes and no votes (as would certainly be the case with Usenet
> CFVs).
> 
> The "don't care" camp is _going_ to get underrepresented in any vote, so
> the question is what value or relevance should abstentions should have
> in the process.

That isn't your decision.  Otherwise we get government by 'the league
of concerned citizens' (unless the ad-hoc-vigillante posse of
unconcerned citizens tosses the aforementioned concerned citizens into
the moat).

Laura