Re: DPL Election up to the minute status
Hi,
Devotee now signs acks. The nect vote, the secretary can sign
the vote key (it is a per vote key), and publish the signed key
before the vote.
Please note that devotee does not grok encrypted
ballots. Anyone who thinks this is suboptimal is welcome to provide
patches ;-)
manoj
--
#!/usr/bin/perl -- Russ Allbery, Just Another Perl Hacker
#yn{u$$[~||Juukn{=,S~|}Jwx}qn{Yn{uQjltn{ 0gFzD gD, 00Fz, 0,,(
#0hF 0g)F/=, 0 L$/GEIFewe{,$/ 0C$~ @=,m,|,(e 0.), 01,pnn,y{ rw}
#;,$0=q,$,,($_=$^)=~y,$/ C-~@=\n\r,-~$:-u/
##y,d,s,(\$.),$1,gee,print Russ Allbery
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: February 17th Voting GR draft
On Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 06:07:14PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Under A.2 Calling for a vote, change item 2 to read ^^ 2. The proposer or any sponsor of a resolution may call for a vote on that resolution and all related amendments. 4. The minimum discussion period is counted from the time the last formal amendment was accepted, or since the whole resolution was proposed if no amendments have been proposed and accepted. That was items 2 *and* 4. Replace A.5 with: A.5. Expiry If a proposed resolution has not been discussed, amended, voted on or otherwise dealt with for 4 weeks the secretary may issue a statement that the issue is being withdrawn. If none of the sponsors of any of the proposals object within a week, the issue is withdrawn. The secretary may also include suggestions on how to proceed, if appropriate. That second paragraph seems useless. It should probably be a rationale/footnote/whatever that stuff is called. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing, `. `' | Imperial College, `- -- | London, UK pgpvhTojsvaBm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: February 17th Voting GR draft
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: c. If a supermajority of S:1 is required for A, it's majority ratio is S, otherwise it's majority ratio is 1. s/it's/its/! I think I mentioned this last time too... RATIONALE: Options which the voters rank above the default option are options they find acceptable. Options ranked below the default options are options they find unacceptable. ...and asked why RATIONALE was quoted, though I care more about the apostrophes. -- Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org) Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NOT a valid e-mail address) for more info.
April 17th Draft of the Voting GR
Hi, Here is the version with the recent suggestions. manoj __ DRAFT: __ Under 4.2 Procedure [for developers during a general resolution or election], change item 3 to read: 3. Votes are taken by the Project Secretary. Votes, tallies, and results are not revealed during the voting period; after the vote the Project Secretary lists all the votes cast. The voting period is 2 weeks, but may be varied by up to 1 week by the Project Leader, and may be ended by the Project Secretary when the outcome is no longer in doubt. In this context, we ignore the possibility that people might want to change their vote. __ Under 5.2 Appointment of project leader, change item 7 to read: 7. The decision will be made using the method specified in section A.6 of the Standard Resolution Procedure. The quorum is the same as for a General Resolution (s.4.2) and the default option is None Of The Above. __ Under 6.1 Powers [of the technical committee], change item 7 to read: 7. Appoint the Chairman of the Technical Committee. The Chairman is elected by the Committee from its members. All members of the committee are automatically nominated; the committee vote starting one week before the post will become vacant (or immediately, if it is already too late). The members may vote by public acclamation for any fellow committee member, including themselves; there is no default option. The vote finishes when all the members have voted or when the outcome is no longer in doubt. The result is determined using the method specified in section A.6 of the Standard Resolution Procedure. __ Under A.2 Calling for a vote, change items 2 and 4 to read 2. The proposer or any sponsor of a resolution may call for a vote on that resolution and all related amendments. 4. The minimum discussion period is counted from the time the last formal amendment was accepted, or since the whole resolution was proposed if no amendments have been proposed and accepted. __ Replace A.3 with: A.3. Voting procedure 1. Each resolution and its related amendments is voted on in a single ballot, that includes an option for the original resolution, each amendment, and the default option (where applicable).. 2. The default option must not have any supermajority requirements. Options which do not have an explicit supermajority requirement have a 1:1 majority requirement. 3. The votes are counted according to the the rules in A.6. Unless otherwise specified, the default option is Further Discussion. 4. In cases of doubt the Project Secretary shall decide on matters of procedure. __ Replace A.5 with: A.5. Expiry If a proposed resolution has not been discussed, amended, voted on or otherwise dealt with for 4 weeks the secretary may issue a statement that the issue is being withdrawn. If none of the sponsors of any of the proposals object within a week, the issue is withdrawn. The secretary may also include suggestions on how to proceed, if appropriate. __ Replace A.6 with: A.6 Vote Counting 1. Each voter's ballot ranks the options being voted on. Not all options need be ranked. Ranked options are considered preferred to all unranked options. Voters may rank options equally. Unranked options are considered to be ranked equally with one another. Details of how ballots may be filled out will be included in the Call For Votes. 2. If the ballot has a quorum requirement R any options other than the default option which do not receive at least R votes ranking that option above the default option are dropped from consideration. 3. Any (non-default) option which does not defeat the default option by its required majority ratio is dropped from consideration. a. Given two options A and B, V(A,B) is the number of voters who prefer option A over option B. b. An option A defeats the default option D by a majority ratio N, if V(A,D) is strictly greater than N * V(D,A). c. If a supermajority of S:1 is required for A, its majority ratio is S; otherwise, its majority ratio is 1.
quorum in 2003 DPL election results
Hello Manoj, could we please have a sentence like all candiates did meet the quorum requirement in addition to this strange Only one candidate failed to win by a margin greater than the quorum thing on the web page http://www.debian.org/vote/2003/vote_0001 In my eyes the current version of the page tries to lead the reader to the wrong conclusion that one candidate would have failed the quorum requirement. Jochen -- Omm (0)-(0) http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/index.html pgpZQ0OejhsbW.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: April 17th Draft of the Voting GR
Hello, On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 09:57:40AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: 3. Any (non-default) option which does not defeat the default option by its required majority ratio is dropped from consideration. a. Given two options A and B, V(A,B) is the number of voters who prefer option A over option B. b. An option A defeats the default option D by a majority ratio N, if V(A,D) is strictly greater than N * V(D,A). c. If a supermajority of S:1 is required for A, its majority ratio is S; otherwise, its majority ratio is 1. Assuming we really want this clause, we should try to get it complete: what happens in the case that 3b+3c eliminates all options? I guess the default option should win then? And do we really want to drop the default option at this point? If this is the case, we could add a sentenct like note that this removes the default option from the ballot. 5. If there are defeats between options in the Schwartz set, we drop the weakest such defeats, and return to step 4. I asked this before: is the concept of dropping a defeat really clear without explanation? At least it is not clear to me. Does it mean dropping the defeated option? Or setting the values in two cells of the tally table to 0? 6. If there are no defeats within the Schwartz set, then .. How could there be defeats within the Schwartz set at this point? Couldn't we simply write The elector with the casting vote chooses the winner among the remaining options? I hope this helps, Jochen -- Omm (0)-(0) http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/index.html pgpgg0NFkV4Fu.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: April 17th Draft of the Voting GR
On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 09:57:40AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: 3. Any (non-default) option which does not defeat the default option by its required majority ratio is dropped from consideration. a. Given two options A and B, V(A,B) is the number of voters who prefer option A over option B. b. An option A defeats the default option D by a majority ratio N, if V(A,D) is strictly greater than N * V(D,A). c. If a supermajority of S:1 is required for A, its majority ratio is S; otherwise, its majority ratio is 1. On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 12:15:59AM +0200, Jochen Voss wrote: Assuming we really want this clause, we should try to get it complete: what happens in the case that 3b+3c eliminates all options? I guess the default option should win then? 3. only eliminates non-default options. At least, that's the way it's supposed to read. Did you miss the first sentence? And do we really want to drop the default option at this point? If this is the case, we could add a sentenct like note that this removes the default option from the ballot. Why would we want to do that? 5. If there are defeats between options in the Schwartz set, we drop the weakest such defeats, and return to step 4. I asked this before: is the concept of dropping a defeat really clear without explanation? At least it is not clear to me. Does it mean dropping the defeated option? Or setting the values in two cells of the tally table to 0? Maybe we should define dropped -- if it's ambiguous, that's not good. What kinds of ambiguity do you see? Personally, the only ambiguity I see is that we drop defeats in 5. and we drop options in 2. and 3. That might invite an unwarranted parallel in some people's minds. Probably, to reduce ambiguity, we should probably use the phrase removed from consideration for 2. and 3. (where we're dealing with options rather than defeats). If you think we need more than this, perhaps you could explain what kind(s) of ambiguity you see? 6. If there are no defeats within the Schwartz set, then .. How could there be defeats within the Schwartz set at this point? That's a guard condition -- if there are defeats within the Schwartz set we shouldn't be applying this rule. Couldn't we simply write The elector with the casting vote chooses the winner among the remaining options? That seems to fail to say when it's time to apply this rule. Thanks, -- Raul
