[Osmf-talk] 2015 AGM results
roland.olbricht at gmx.de
Thu Dec 17 17:45:01 UTC 2015
> I have the information, but still need to write up the minutes,
> hopefully this week.
> For the curious, Richard Weait has posted an analysis at
> http://weait.com/osmf-board-election-results-2015. For formalities sake,
> I am noting that I am not certifying his analysis as accurate.
First of all, thank you for the data. In particular a big thank you to
Richard Weait for the cross-checking analysis and the data package.
An import detail of this (and the previous) election is that most
ballots were ineffective beyond the first position:
- for everybody who had "Ilya Zverev" or "Peter Barth" on the first
position, his or her vote is exhausted with the success of these two
candidates in the first round
- for everybody who had "Martijn van Exel" in the first position, his or
her vote is also exhausted, everything else on the ballot is weighted
with only less than 0.1 (in fact 1/12)
While this is both perfectly on purpose for the voting scheme and rather
beneficial as it makes the board more diverse, I think it is not what
voters that are not used to STV would expect.
- The ballot is essentially exhausted with the highest ranked successful
candidate on the list.
Given Gregorys mail:
> I ranked my votes, as STV allows. However I didn't really care which order my 1st & 2nd choices were in.
I think that quite a lot of voters didn't notice that.
I think we should use the term "single vote" instead of STV in future
voting instructions: Those who wonder why they should produce a list for
a single vote will then learn how STV actually works. Those who don't
notice the discrepancy would probably anyway not understand how to
More information about the osmf-talk