john palmieri a écrit :
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote:
The way forward seems clear to me - the membership committee decides what
counting method will be used, announces it, and we count the election
according to that means. There doesn't need to be a
On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 15:38 +0200, Dave Neary wrote:
Dave Neary wrote:
A small correction to explain exactly how random transfers work:
In count 1, Vincent has 60 votes, they're shoved into a stack. The top
33 votes from the stack get redistributed in count 2.
So the phrase vote
Neither california law nor our own various legal documents have anything
substantive to say on the issue.
Luis (not a lawyer; this is not legal advice)
On Jun 29, 2009 4:03 AM, Andy Tai a...@atai.org wrote:
Is it legal according to California law that the membership committee can
decide the
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Julien Puydt jpu...@gnome.org wrote:
john palmieri a écrit :
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote:
The way forward seems clear to me - the membership committee decides what
counting method will be used, announces it, and we
Dear Foundation Members :)
The GNOME Foundation Membership Elections Committee is pleased to
announce preliminary results for the Board of Directors. The preliminary
results announced on 2009-06-24 are not going to be validated
whatsoever. Instead, these preliminary results will be validated
Hi,
Diego Escalante Urrelo wrote:
I disagree, afaik we just directly re-used the code received from
maemo.org through you (iirc). Which in your March elections used this
same system:
http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-community/2009-March/002139.html
There are 2 things here: the election
Hi,
Stormy Peters wrote:
I too think the election committee should just decide.
(From board discussions, I'm pretty confident they wanted to do it
however Maemo does it, but at this point I think the election committee
should decide.)
I'd replace decide with clarify here - it's clear there
Hi,
A small correction to explain exactly how random transfers work:
Filippo Argiolas wrote:
- with Random Transfer, 20 ballots are picked randomly (assuming those
60 votes are already random you can just pick last 20 received, first
20, or more complex randomizing methods). The thing is that
Hi,
Dave Neary wrote:
A small correction to explain exactly how random transfers work:
Well, actually, I just found out from the OpenSTV guys, that how Filippo
said is how they work.
In count 1, Vincent has 60 votes, they're shoved into a stack. The top
33 votes from the stack get
On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 19:22 +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote:
2009/6/26 Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org:
Hi,
Dave Neary wrote:
A small correction to explain exactly how random transfers work:
Well, actually, I just found out from the OpenSTV guys, that how Filippo
said is how they work.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 4:58 AM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote:
Hi,
Stormy Peters wrote:
I too think the election committee should just decide.
(From board discussions, I'm pretty confident they wanted to do it however
Maemo does it, but at this point I think the election committee
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 5:11 AM, Dave Nearydne...@gnome.org wrote:
Hi Tobias,
Tobias Mueller wrote:
These results can be challenged by sending an e-mail to
electi...@gnome.org. The challenges have to be sent before Tuesday,
June 30, 2009, 23:59 UTC. Please note that these results should not
On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 10:11 +0200, Dave Neary wrote:
You just announced the results based on first-past-the-post, when the
elections were to be run using preferential voting, with single
transferable vote and fractional surplus transfer.
Ah ! the famous 'Meek' method (no relation);
Is it really fair if people can't agree on how it works? Seems to go
against the GNOME principle of simplicity by adding more choices to fix some
of the issues of voting. I'm all for making things more fair but I'm not
sure the complexity actually fixes things or hides the issues under a layer
Hi,
john palmieri wrote:
Is it really fair if people can't agree on how it works? Seems to go
against the GNOME principle of simplicity by adding more choices to fix
some of the issues of voting. I'm all for making things more fair but
I'm not sure the complexity actually fixes things or
I too think the election committee should just decide.
(From board discussions, I'm pretty confident they wanted to do it however
Maemo does it, but at this point I think the election committee should
decide.)
Stormy
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Dan Winship d...@gnome.org wrote:
On
On 06/25/2009 12:30 PM, john palmieri wrote:
If it is a disagreement on how votes should be counted then the vote is
flawed and I propose we have a runoff between the candidates who were on
one list but not the other.
I'm not terribly familiar with STV and its variations, but it seems to
me
Is it just not a good year to have elections? :)
behdad
On 06/25/2009 12:30 PM, john palmieri wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org
mailto:dne...@gnome.org wrote:
Hi,
The way forward seems clear to me - the membership committee decides
what
2009/6/25 john palmieri john.j5.palmi...@gmail.com:
Is it really fair if people can't agree on how it works? Seems to go
against the GNOME principle of simplicity by adding more choices to fix some
of the issues of voting. I'm all for making things more fair but I'm not
sure the complexity
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Dan Winship d...@gnome.org wrote:
On 06/25/2009 12:30 PM, john palmieri wrote:
If it is a disagreement on how votes should be counted then the vote is
flawed and I propose we have a runoff between the candidates who were on
one list but not the other.
Tobias Mueller wrote:
If the results are not challenged, then the elected directors will be:
Behdad Esfahbod
Brian Cameron
Diego Escalante Urrelo
Germán Póo-Caamaño
Jorge Castro
Lucas Rocha
Vincent Untz
Some figures about the votes: there were
Hi,
Pascal Terjan wrote:
Let's imagine that 8 people vote 1/ Candidate A 2/ Candidate B, and 2
people vote 1/ Candidate B
Then A will have 8 votes and B will have 10 votes but 8 people will
prefer A while only 2 will prefer B so A should be elected even if he
has less votes
No - A will have
Hi Tobias,
Tobias Mueller wrote:
These results can be challenged by sending an e-mail to
electi...@gnome.org. The challenges have to be sent before Tuesday,
June 30, 2009, 23:59 UTC. Please note that these results should not
be considered final until any such challenges have been resolved.
Hi,
Le mercredi 24 juin 2009, à 10:11 +0200, Dave Neary a écrit :
The table on this results page shows the results with random transfer
STV. When this was discussed over at Maemo, it was proposed agreed
that we should use the more accurate fractional transfer STV, since
running random
Hey everyone :)
The GNOME Foundation Membership Elections Committee is pleased to
announce the preliminary results for the Board of Directors.
We strongly encourage everyone to look at the detailed results to verify
their ballot. You can also run the software used to count the results to
On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 03:11 +0200, Tobias Mueller wrote:
Candidates in order of votes received, with affiliations:
Vincent Untz (60 votes) - Novell, Inc.
Behdad Esfahbod(56 votes) - Red Hat
Germán Póo-Caamaño (20 votes) - None
Brian
26 matches
Mail list logo
