Re: GNOME Foundation Elections - Official list of candidates

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Robert Love wrote:

> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:11:59 -0500
> From: Robert Love <rml novell com>
> To: "Danilo [iso-8859-2] Šegan" <danilo gnome org>
> Cc: Alan Horkan <horkana maths tcd ie>, foundation-list gnome org
> Subject: Re: GNOME Foundation Elections - Official list of candidates
> On Thu, 2004-11-11 at 21:34 +0100, Danilo Šegan wrote:
> > I think nothing stops anyone from voting for all six of Novell
> > employees (there's no rule against it, AFAIK).  They cannot all be
> > elected, but I don't see how this system of voting is worse for them
> > (not taking the "4-rule" into account) than any other system (which
> > would be used along with the "4-rule").  If they're all "popular"
> > candidates, they'll end up in a battle between themselves, using any
> > of the systems.  If some of them are not "popular", they won't be
> > elected no matter what :-)
> Right, people can vote for any number of people with a shared
> affiliation and someone might indeed want to vote for all six Novell
> employees, but in this voting system that can result in scenarios where
> I decrease the chances of the "more likely" four winning.


> I am not arguing for or against changing to a Ranked Ballot system, just
> trying to explain what Alan is saying.

Thanks for the help.

I was trying to point out some facts.
In case anyone is wondering I'm not in any way against the quota.

Maybe I should resisted the temptation to mention my desire to change the
voting system but I cannot help but throw that in anychance I get (and
I'll probably be suggesting compulsory turnout next if you are not careful

I thought the Anonymous voting had been passed, have the prelimnary
results been challenged or is the infrastructure just not in place to
implement it this soon?


Alan Horkan
Inkscape, Draw Freely
Free SVG Clip Art

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]