List Archive: gentoo-nfp
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
Aron Griffis wrote: [Wed Apr 27 2005, 08:48:40PM CDT]
> I don't want to delay things with an unnecessary discussion, but
> wouldn't Condorcet voting work well in this situation?
Quite possibly. I hope you noticed the part of my e-mail where I
mentioned that my proposal wasn't necessarily a good one. The reason is
that I know very little about election theory.
In any event, I'm reasonably happy with any well-established voting
> If we were to go ahead with a Condorcet election, then each voter
> would need to rank the candidates rather than simply voting yes or no.
> We also would need to decide on the number of trustees that will be
> elected. (I would suggest maintaining the current number for
> simplicity.) However we would have a fair election without the
> possible mishaps that can occur with an ad-hoc scheme.
My worry was that the argument over how many trustees to have could
derail the entire process. Worse, until the trustee archive becomes
available there's no way for people to really make an informed decision
on what the right number happens to be. I claim that we have too many
trustees as it is, because right now its rare for all trustees (or even
a majority) to comment on any issue, but what's a good number?
That said, if we have too many trustees for another year, its hardly the
end of the world, and the foundation can always change things next year.
So, if 13 (the current number) is minimally contentious, I'll support
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76