Dear James Gilmour, > > in 2007, the Wikimedia Foundation used approval > > voting for the elections of its Board of Trustees. > > Here is the election result: > > > > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/Results/en > > > > No candidate was approved by a majority. > > Given that this was 3-member election, is that any > surprise?
Yes, I had expected that, in an M-seat election under approval voting, most voters voted for at least M candidates. > The subject line says this was a Condorcet election, > but the presentation of the results gives no indication > of that. Indeed, from the votes listed at > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/Results/en > it looks like a multi-member first-past-the-post election > in which the top three take the three seats. In 2007, the Wikimedia Foundation used approval voting: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/Results/en In 2008, it used the Schulze method: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2008/Results/en Markus Schulze ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
