<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 02/05/2020 09:54, Yves wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:98921F4B-4638-4271-80BB-34CE085838CA@mailbox.org">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">IMHO, a a/b/c/d kind of vote like for the last Article of Association change would be preferable to really have a more representative idea of the contributor feelings. Could the OSMF set up such a process?</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>only related to the voting method, what method is used
currently? when you offer more than two options, and you want to
choose one, there's criteria to consider, and "first past the
post" is a bad strategy. <br>
</p>
<p>if you like reading things in latin, there's the original
literature <i>Ars notandi</i>, <i>Ars eleccionis</i>, and <i>Alia
ars eleccionis</i> by <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramon_Llull">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramon_Llull</a><i><br>
</i></p>
<p>I think this is a very clear example:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method#Example:_Voting_on_the_location_of_Tennessee's_capital">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method#Example:_Voting_on_the_location_of_Tennessee's_capital</a></p>
<p>and otherwise a more detailed description here:<br>
</p>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method</a> (this is used by
Debian).<br>
</body>
</html>