On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 20:21, inode0 <inode0@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 9:12 PM, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 06:45:24PM -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 17:15, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> > On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >> I am for this if we can change how we elect people (either make voting >>> >> mandatory, change range-voting to a more parliamentary system, and/or >>> >> make voting per seat versus pool). As I have said before, while I >>> >> would have gotten this slot if there had been one more seat >>> >> available.. the difference in votes for me versus the next candidate >>> >> (and versus the other 2 contenders) was significant. >>> > >>> > It's difficult to see how we actually do this while having multiple >>> > seats up for election at the same time. We don't have any concept of >>> > districting by which to separate seats out as distinct opportunities. >>> > >>> >>> It is more of my understanding of Range Voting as a method to select >>> seats and isn't meant to be used for a pool of seats. With a pool we >>> could go with something much more simpler and be as valid (vote >>> +1/0/-1 for a candidate and those with the most votes above 0 get in >>> :)). The seats is mainly for making keeping change as simple as >>> possible in the election system. >>> >> Wait... You mean one pool and just have votes of +1/0/-1 for everyone? If >> so, that's still range voting.... (believe it or not, Vote +1/0/-1 and only >> +1 counts is also range voting. It's distinctive enough that it has its own >> name, though: approval voting). > > You know, I'd like this not to be a referendum on the voting method. > If whatever we are doing is ok for 2 or 3 open seats on the board it > is surely good enough for 3 or 4 open seats. If it is good enough for > 4 or 5 open seats on FESCo and 7 open seats on FAmSCo I don't get why > this is an issue. While I think it is not to my taste, I see it as a > side issue. You are right.. I will remove my pet peeve from the discussion at the moment :). -- Stephen J Smoogen. “The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance.” Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University. "We have a strategic plan. It's called doing things."" — Herb Kelleher, founder Southwest Airlines _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
