On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 11:32:18AM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 02:18:26AM +0000, Michael Meeks wrote:
>> This piece matches my pocket calculation too =) and FWIW; I >> think it's good to have Marina at the top of the list for several >> reasons; though personally I'm not a fan of any special difference >> between elected Directors based on ordering. > Yes, I think for future elections we should publish the elected > candidates in alphabetical order only. If we want to give hints to > the upcoming board who is a good candidate to become > Chairwomen/Chairman, we should list the first rank votes after the > name, but not the "order" of elected candidates from a voting system > that was never designed to provide a preference between the elected > candidates. For the selection of the Chairwomen/Chairman -- where > there is only one seat -- this vote actually makes a lot of sense. >From a naive POV, *yes* they provide a ranking, since one of these persons would not have been elected if the number of people to elect would be one less... Recurse, and you get a ranking. (This assumes some stability to the algorithm...) To choose a chairperson from the votes, we could pick the Condorcet winner as Chairperson :) (there usually is one, even though not mathematically guaranteed). (Unless the elected body chooses its own chairperson which seems to be the case here.) -- Lionel -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
