Re: Anonymous Voting Referendum

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 03:04:52PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Llu, 2004-09-13 at 15:50, James Henstridge wrote:
> > Usually proportional representation is used to describe a system where 
> > the number of seats each party gets is proportional to the number of 
> > people who voted for them (so if 10% of voters vote for party X, then 
> > party X gets 10% of the seats).
> > 
> > Since each candidate in the foundation election is an independent and 
> > can win at most one seat, I don't really think proportional 
> > representation applies here.
> 
> If anything the EU suggests that the basic party based form is the worst
> possible case for the foundation. Party lists mean that whoever is top
> of the list is sure of a cushy job, whoever is bottom isn't going to.
> The result of this is that nobody dares stand against their party even
> when they know the party is wrong, because they will be moved down the
> list next election and punished for it.
> 
> The foundation people stand and are elected for their views not their
> employer so we don't want such lists IMHO.

  Historically the foundation elections were supposed to be slate based
but this got turned down, one thing is sure I don't want to go back and
I don't understand how proportional representation can apply when votes
are going to individuals (no, we can't have 2/3rd of Nat and 1/3rd of
Miguel on the board :-)

  http://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2000-September/msg00032.html

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Desktop team http://redhat.com/
veillard redhat com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/