I would have also liked the ability to vote for N candidates (where N = number of positions being elected). Otherwise, I feel that I have to vote strategically to get a good selection of candidates (i.e. is there someone I think will get a lot of votes and thus I can use my vote on someone I think we have complementary skills/balance.
Alternatively, I'm a big fan of transferable vote systems. Neil On 15 February 2016 at 11:04, Williams, Jason <[email protected]> wrote: > Honest to goodness question, > > Maybe I missed this but is there a reason we didn't use the same style of > voting used last year? Choosing only one candidate makes it impossible to > think about choosing a committee that is balanced. Since we are voting for > a group (not only one person/position) I really liked that. > > I guess it all turns out in the end, but raising the point in case anyone > else may have even better reasons to agree/disagree with me. > > Happy voting! > > - Jason > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org > > -- Neil Chue Hong Director, Software Sustainability Institute EPCC, University of Edinburgh, JCMB, Edinburgh, EH9 3FD, UK Tel: +44 (0)131 650 5957 http://www.software.ac.uk/ LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/neilchuehong Twitter: http://twitter.com/npch ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8876-7606
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
