Proposed Board resolution for Board electoral system, version 20170309 (was Re: Final proposed Board resolution for Board elections voting system)

Thank you Ian.

On 2017-03-09 10:27, Ian Jackson wrote:
> 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.

Typo "the the"

>
> 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.
>
>

The word "liase" should read "liaise".

Paragraphs 1 and 3 refer to the notion of proportionality, which has no clear meaning in the context of elections without parties like SPI's.

I have no issues with substance.

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