On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Tomasz Ganicz <polime...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, the funny thing with current system is that if people had voted in
> most rational way - i.e. to maximize the impact of their votes - the
> results would have been negative for all candidates - as this year none of
> them got more than 50% of positive votes. But in fact if all people would
> vote in that way - negative votes would be negligible - as the result will
> be simple exactly the same as if there will be no "no" votes - in both
> methods of calculation :-) What makes negative votes so important is just
> because people are not voting in rational way as they have some mental
> objections to vote "no". But those brave ones (or smart ones or bad ones)
> enough to vote "no" have much higher impact on the results than the others
> - which I think is not good by itslef.
> By the way would interesting to know how many voters voted only "yes" and
> "no", and how many voted "yes" for only one candidate and "no" for all
> others (the most impact for selected candidate).

Based on the numbers, it's likely that the voting was dominantly like:
"I want this candidate or two"; "I have no opinion about these
candidates"; and "I really really wouldn't like to see this one or two
as Board members".

I'd say that our democracy depends on such behavior of voters, as at
the end we are getting good people in the Board, no matter who has
been elected particularly. However, it could change and it could have
dramatic consequences, as we are operating with small numbers.

What's more likely to be seen as the outcome of "rational voting" is
to get one or few candidates with 50% less opposing votes and although
it wouldn't need to be bad in the sense of particular candidates, it
would make very negative consequences to the rest of the community.

First time such thing happens, next time we'd have bitter fight for
every vote. And that would be the changing point: from friendly to
competitive atmosphere. It would also mean that we'd get serious
hidden lobby groups. (We have them now, but it's relaxed and much more
about "it would be great if our candidate would pass", than about
serious fights for own candidates.)

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Reply via email to