* "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <jmbsvicetto@g.o>:
> Ferris McCormick wrote:
> > Torsten Veller <tove@g.o> wrote:
> >> * Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o>:
> >>> Since Cardoe was the last person from the council vote with a 
> >>> distribution that's anywhere between "more positive than negative" and 
> >>> "even", I suggest that we leave the remaining spot open rather than 
> >>> filling it with someone who the majority of developers ranked in the 
> >>> bottom half of candidates.
> >> The "bottom half" depends somehow on the number of candidates.
> 
> Donnie is talking here about the relative votes each candidate received
> and not about the rank of a candidate in relation to others.
[...]
> It doesn't matter if there were 18, 15 or 100 candidates in the ballot.
> What matters is the distribution of votes.

We can't vote for "reelection".
If one says "Dev A" is a better council candidate than "Dev B" it doesn't
mean that "Dev B" is not a good council candidate.


 |      #     # #
 |      #     # #
 |   #  #     # #
 |   #  #     # #
 |#  ## #  #  # #
 |#  ## #  #  # #
 |#  ## #  #  # #
 |#  ##### # ## ##
 |## ##### # ## ##
 |######## #########
 |######## #########
 |######## #########
 |##################
 |##################
 +-------------------

So how would you backup the claim about "relative votes" and "ranked in
the bottom half of candidates"?


Jorge, or any other election official, can you explain why the master
ballot contains 145 ballots and council-2008-results.txt says: "We
received 143 valid votes and two invalid (two people who forgot to issue
votify --submit)."