Re: Final proposed Board resolution for Board elections voting system

Ian Jackson writes ("Final proposed Board resolution for Board elections voting system"):
> NB that I will be offline on the 10th and 11th of March, and will have
> only limited network access between then and the Board meeting. So if
> there are any more comments, please make them ASAP.

There were some comments about the rationale, and about the clarity of
the paragraph stating the primacy of the official rules over the
software. I have updated para 1 and para 8, with the changes posted
previously. There is no change to the effect of the resolution.

Last call.

WHEREAS

1. SPI's voting system for Board elections is unique to our
organisation and has several problems; notably, a lack of
proportionality.

2. SPI is not equipped to effectively design or analyse voting
systems. We wish to adopt a system widely used elsewhere, and
which is recommended by civil society organisations specialising in
voting reform.

3. The Single Transferrable Vote is the only proportional voting
system, suitable for SPI, which meets these criteria.

4. The Scottish STV variant is clearly specified; we have an
established and stable Free Software implementation of it; and it
is straightforward to (re)implement. Other STV variants appear to
lack some of these good properties.

5. Ian Jackson has offered to help with the implementation of STV for
SPI.

THEREFORE THE SPI BOARD RESOLVES

6. Future elections to the SPI Board will be counted according to the
Scottish Single Transferrable Vote. Scottish STV will also be used
by SPI for any other multi-winner election.

7. Specifically, the algorithm to be used is that specified in
Rules 45-52 of the Scottish Local Government Elections Order
2007 (a UK Statutory Instrument):
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ssi/2007/42/schedule/1/part/III/crossheading/counting-of-votes/made

8. The practical implementation will be by means of software; for
example, perhaps the openstv package in Debian. The choice of
software is up to the Secretary. However, any differences between
the the Rules in the Order referenced above, and whatever software
implementation is chosen, are to be resolved in favour of the
Rules.

9. The SPI Secretary is requested to liase with Ian Jackson, so that
the necessary changes to SPI software and infrastructure can be
identified and implemented.

--
Ian Jackson <ijackson(at)chiark(dot)greenend(dot)org(dot)uk> These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.