I think it’s great that people are speaking up here with their thoughts on this matter, even if they rehash arguments that have been discussed ad nauseam earlier.
I think it’s also reasonable to expect that those arguments won’t be entertained again by everyone else at the same depth that they have been previously, lest a process many here (including myself) are keenly interested in seeing result in change before the next round of elections be derailed into an infinite rehash of arguments and counterpoints. Since my viewpoint on this doesn’t seem to be one that has been expressed as vociferously here yet, I’ll say that I agree quite strongly with both Ian’s voting system proposal, as well as his reasons for why we should adopt it. Also, in my opinion there’s a real cost to not acting and simply continuing to do what we have done in the past, compared to adopting a system that has appreciable and demonstrable benefits (in terms of promoting the kind of representation on the Board that is desirable) over the system we have had, even if it is not the possibly very best system in every regard and circumstance. Especially so if the proposed system is one that has a low risk of having as-yet-undiscovered pathological properties, as a system would have that, as per Ian’s argument, is widely adopted for real elections of the same kind as our Board elections. -hilmar -- Hilmar Lapp -:- lappland.io _______________________________________________ Spi-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
