On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Frantisek Dufka <[email protected]> wrote: > [snip] > I didn't mean you should vote for other than your #1. I just think that > with ranking method the next positions have bigger effect [...]
BTW, this is a good discussion to have. Whilst this round of voting is fresh in our minds, and the votes are easily analysable, I don't see a problem with changing it *again* (if a consensus emerges that a change may be necessary). Personally, I'm happy with the result but a discussion on how we got here, and how we can best explain the voting is a Good Thing[TM]. My own interpretation when voting (which is probably unscientific and inaccurate; I don't spend all day working out voting models) was "if choice #1 isn't going to get elected, who would I rather see next?" *not* "I want all my vote to be split up and allocated in these proportions to these candidates". Cheers, Andrew -- Andrew Flegg -- mailto:[email protected] | http://www.bleb.org/ Maemo Community Council member _______________________________________________ maemo-community mailing list [email protected] https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
