User:Pakaran/sandbox


 * Alright, to start with, I agree completely regarding Proposal 14. My statement regarding the "strongest consensus" was sloppy, and could as easily have read "Proposal 2 has consensus, which Proposal 14 does not, and by my reading, Proposal 1 fails due to being significantly more weakly supported than Proposal 1 and incompatible".  From your statement, we must apply the stronger reasoning of "Which, if any, members of the set, considered on their own merits, are passing".  This is not true of Proposal 14, even disregarding the prohibited !vote by a banned user recently noted on the RFC page.


 * It appeared to me that a significant number of !voters were acting under the impression that only one of Proposal 1 and 2 would be adopted, and I was deliberately attempting to avoid looking at the various "implicit opposition" data. As such, it was not clear to me whether that data had been seen as only including users who supported Proposal 4 (and as such opposed the various "PC may be used in X conditions" Proposals), or also included one or more other conflicting pair(s).  So, having read your comments, I will reassess the issue of, firstly, "are Proposal 1 and 2 compatible".


 * I can indeed imagine a closing statement in which usage were allowed in either circumstance. As perhaps an understatement, this doesn't seem to have been a universal assumption going in, however, and I would argue that we do not need to reach this issue.


 * Proposal 1, by the ~2/3 standard discussed above, would be marginally if at all passing if we were counting !votes. Additionally, a great deal of its support is lukewarm, and often as a second choice to Proposal 2.  Therefore, my view is that, regardless of many of the not-so-minor details I've discussed, Proposal 2 is the only Proposal named in this section which has consensus.