Re: Final Call for Votes and extra Voting Information - 2007 SPI board elections

This is the final call for votes for the 2007 SPI board elections.

There have been (at time of writing) 59 total unique votes cast, which
is 15.1282051282% of all possible votes.

There have also been some queries raised about the implementation of
condorcet voting that SPI uses. If you have not rated all candidates, it
is important you check this information to ensure your vote reflects
your views.

In summary:
- Not rating a candidate at all does NOT mean that they are automatically
ranked below other candidates.
- Additionally, a vote for ONE candidate is equivalent to an empty vote.

Read below for further details, and for information on how to vote in
general.

Voting preferences
==================
Your preference will best be shown when you specify *all candidates*, in
order of preference (i.e. "XYZWTUV", X being the most preferred). Voting
"XY" states that you prefer candidate X to Y.

**************************************************
* However, it does not express any preference *
* relationships for any of the other candidates. *
**************************************************

Namely, in an election of ABC, a vote of AB would mean you are happy
with a final result of:
- A>B>C
- C>A>B
- A>C>B

Voting details
==============
Voting is only open to contributing members.

To vote, please go to:
http://members.spi-inc.org/vote/
Select the 2007 board election, and cast your ballot.

You can change your ballot as many times as you want until the close of
voting at 2007-07-28 23:59:59 UTC. Vote early, vote often!

For full information about this election, including the names and
platforms of the candidates and other related information, please see:
http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/votes/vote6/

Results will be announced before the end of July 30th.
The officers will be selected at the next board meeting on August 1st,
2006.
--
Neil McGovern
Secretary, Software in the Public Interest, Inc.

On 25-Jul-07, 15:27 (CDT), Neil McGovern <neilm(at)spi-inc(dot)org> wrote:
> There have also been some queries raised about the implementation of
> condorcet voting that SPI uses. If you have not rated all candidates, it
> is important you check this information to ensure your vote reflects
> your views.
>
> In summary:
> - Not rating a candidate at all does NOT mean that they are automatically
> ranked below other candidates.
> - Additionally, a vote for ONE candidate is equivalent to an empty vote.

Why on earth are you not using the Debian implementation?

Steve

--
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world. -- seen on the net

Steve Greenland <steveg(at)moregruel(dot)net> wrote:
> Why on earth are you not using the Debian implementation?

At a guess, because the Debian implementation doesn't do multi-winner
elections. There was a recent discussion about the best way to extend
it to multi-winners in the "soc-ctte discussion" thread centred around
http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2007/06/msg00254.html

If you'd like to discuss how to extend the Debian implementation to
produce multi-winners, I suggest doing that on debian-project. The
soc-ctte seems likely to be an earlier test than next spi-board and if
it works, it could be proposed for spi-board.

Hope that helps,
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 09:00:22AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Steve Greenland <steveg(at)moregruel(dot)net> wrote:
> > Why on earth are you not using the Debian implementation?
>
> At a guess, because the Debian implementation doesn't do multi-winner
> elections. There was a recent discussion about the best way to extend
> it to multi-winners in the "soc-ctte discussion" thread centred around
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2007/06/msg00254.html
>
> If you'd like to discuss how to extend the Debian implementation to
> produce multi-winners, I suggest doing that on debian-project. The
> soc-ctte seems likely to be an earlier test than next spi-board and if
> it works, it could be proposed for spi-board.

That supposed the soc-ctte proposal gets implemented, which means a
vote, and the project currently is in limbo as far as i can tell.

Friendly,

Sven Luther

On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 09:00:22AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Steve Greenland <steveg(at)moregruel(dot)net> wrote:
> > Why on earth are you not using the Debian implementation?
> At a guess, because the Debian implementation doesn't do multi-winner
> elections.

The SPI election method has the same problems with multi-winner elections
as using the Debian implementation would, fwiw. I think the SPI method was
used by Debian prior to the adoption of the current Cloneproof Schwartz
method and devotee.

Cheers,
aj

Anthony Towns <aj(at)azure(dot)humbug(dot)org(dot)au> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 09:00:22AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Steve Greenland <steveg(at)moregruel(dot)net> wrote:
> > > Why on earth are you not using the Debian implementation?
> > At a guess, because the Debian implementation doesn't do multi-winner
> > elections.
>
> The SPI election method has the same problems with multi-winner elections
> as using the Debian implementation would, fwiw. [...]

Where is the multi-winner implementation stated? If there's one, why
all the discussion over soc-ctte elections?

Have there been multi-winner elections in debian?

Regards,
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 09:00:22AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> At a guess, because the Debian implementation doesn't do multi-winner
> elections. There was a recent discussion about the best way to extend
> it to multi-winners in the "soc-ctte discussion" thread centred around
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2007/06/msg00254.html

FWIW because the list archives are delimited by months, and I replied late,
another subthread got archived separately, here:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2007/07/msg00002.html

--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.