Re: Result for vote regarding new members for the board of directors

On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 08:21:40PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> It might be interesting to see if that would change the result of the
> vote; if so it might be educational for voters.

By my count the actual results are:

Bruce, John, Benj, Craig, Scott, David G. tied with Jimmy, David H.

(Bruce beats John 74:47, John beats Benj 61:51, Benj beats Craig 61:50,
Craig beats Scott 65:52, Scott beats David G. and Jimmy 70:38/73:39,
David G. and Jimmy (tied on 54:54) beat David H. 62:45/56:52)

By my count, the results had the marked options been interpreted as being
preferred to unmarked options, the results would've been:

Bruce, John, Benj tied with Craig, Scott, Jimmy, David G., David H.

(84:46, 72:54/77:53, 66:56/74:54, 80:41, 60:57, 66:52)

21 people didn't include Benj in their ballot, 10 people didn't include
Craig.

For entertainment's sake, a probably buggy implementation of Single
Transferable Vote for three seats also seems to give Bruce, John and
Benj as the winners, with Craig just missing out.

Cheers,
aj

--
Anthony Towns <aj(at)humbug(dot)org(dot)au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

``Dear Anthony Towns: [...] Congratulations --
you are now certified as a Red Hat Certified Engineer!''