Re: steering committee vs foundation
- From: John Harper <john dcs warwick ac uk>
- To: James Henstridge <james daa com au>
- Cc: Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>, bart eazel com,foundation-list gnome org, Bud Tribble <bud eazel com>,Mike Boich <mike eazel com>, brian collab net, rob collab net
- Subject: Re: steering committee vs foundation
- Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 11:25:07 +0100 (BST)
James Henstridge writes:
|On 11 Jul 2000, Havoc Pennington wrote:
|> One nitpick: there's a potential problem with splitting up votes, for
|> example say you have two slates that are the same except for one
|> person, and another entirely different slate, and each gets 1/3 of the
|> vote; probably 66% of the voters would prefer one of the first two
|> slates, instead of the totally different slate, but their vote was split.
|
|That sort of situation can be handled by preferential voting like what is
|used in Australia (and I think UK). It basically selects the least hated
|candidate rather than the most popular, which doesn't disadvantage similar
|slates. In the case you mentioned, if one of the first two slates had the
|least votes, those people's preferences would go to the other slate
|(provided that was their second preference).
I don't think the UK has this (iirc, we have first past the post).
Australia seems to use different voting methods for different
elections? Here are some details I found:
single transferable vote:
http://www.aceproject.org/main/english/es/esf04/default.htm
alternative vote:
http://www.aceproject.org/main/english/es/esd03/default.htm
John
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]