Whereas 1 (Re: Final proposed Board resolution for Board elections voting system)

On 2017-03-08 17:23, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Josh berkus writes ("Re: Final proposed Board resolution for Board elections voting system"):
>>> WHEREAS
>>>
>>> 1. SPI should elect its Board using a roughly-proportional voting
>>> system. Condorcet is good for single-winner elections but is
>>> seriously lacking in proportionality in multi-winner elections such
>>> as SPI's Board Elections.
>> Please cut this paragraph and replace. As written, the paragraph is a
>> source of argument over factors which have little or nothing to do with
>> actually replacing the voting system. Frankly, it reads like a partisan
>> vendetta against concordet. I suggest instead:
>>
>> 1. SPI's concordet voting system is unique to our organization and
>> has had several issues over the years.
> How about
>
> 1. SPI's voting system for Board elections is unique to our
> organisation and has several problems; notably, a lack of
> proportionality.
>
> ?

I have no real problem with this version, though since SPI has no political parties, I am not sure what proportionality means in our context. I am also hesitant about using language like "our" in a resolution. Suggestion:

SPI's voting system for Board elections is unique to SPI and has several problems; notably, a potentially suboptimal representativeness.

[...]

--
Filipus Klutiero
http://www.philippecloutier.com