On Feb 17, 2008 1:47 AM, Shaun McCance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Maybe I'm the only one, but I don't really see the point.
Normally people have preferences over candidates, even between the ones getting their votes. Proposing a preferential system makes sense. > For the board elections, we are electing seven people, > and we each get to cast up to seven votes. I don't > think we've ever seen the list of candidates unfairly > cut due to non-preferential voting. I bet many of us vote _strongly_ for certain candidates and are happy to vote _also_ others. In case of close results (and we had them around the 7th position in the last years) this system might give preference to those candidates _strongly_ supported by a sector of the membership, probably in exchange of candidates voted by many, although not that effusively. Perhaps this gives better chances to commited newcomers or specialists in a single area. I think all in all would help having more radical changes from board to board if there are interesting newcomers. > Any preferential voting systems is going to make the > voting process more difficult. If I had had to order > my votes in previous elections, I'm sure it would have > been mostly arbitrary. If it's not solving any real > problems, why bother? I don't think many people has the same opinion over the seven candidates is voting. Even if it wouldn't make that difference in the final results I think it's worth using it. It makes you think more about who are you voting and who you really want to see in the board. I don't see the big effort of doing this once a year... -- Quim Gil /// http://flors.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
