Re: Election results

On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 11:28:34PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Personally, given the tendency of some members of the SPI membership towards
> extreme uncompromising views and interminable argument, that the Concordet
> method of selecting for the "most acceptable" instead of the "most preferred"
> is a feature and not a bug.

I agree that the Condorcet method is ideal for single-winner elections,
for exactly this reason.

> It would also be trivial for any sufficiently motivated and organized
> project to get behind one candidate from their project to ensure them
> a place on the board.

That's only if no larger portion of the voting membership doesn't
coordinate against that project.

If the membership gets factionalized in a vote for any reason
whatsoever, the majority faction (which may not have >50 % support if
there are more than two factions) is currently able to dictate the
composition of the board, and can deny any other faction enfranchised
representation.

Note that the issue here is of principle. I don't expect this to be a
practical problem in the foreseeable future.

I'm still waiting for someone to point me toward the definition of SPI's
current multi-winner election method.

--
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho, Jyväskylä
http://antti-juhani.kaijanaho.fi/newblog/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/antti-juhani/