Danny Angus ha scritto: > On 07/11/2007, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> 1) Shouldn't we ask to every seconded candidate whether they are willing >> to accept it before starting the vote, so to not run a vote that will >> elect someone that does not want to accept? > > Yes, very good idea! I didn't think that through did I? > >> 2) How the vote between multiple candidates will work? >> - Single preference between the candidate >> - Multiple preferences, the candidate with more preferences is elected? >> - Ranked preferences[1], I'm a fan of ranked voting but I guess they are >> not part of the ASF history. > > I've thought long and hard about this, my culture makes me expect a > simple majority to be the "normal" way, but if you'd rather use some > other means we can if we agree on it. What do you want to do?
I don't have strong preferences, I just want to understand how we will do it :-) I think that "single preference" when you have few voters (PMC members) and many options (seconded people) is less accurate than other solutions. If there is someone that partecipated in one or more similar votes in past we can follow the same procedure. >> 3) Does -1 or similar exists in the PMC Chair vote, and what is its meaning? > > No, I've never heard of that, we're a commitee electing its chair, > majority rule is normal. ok, thank you! Stefano
