[Elections-committee] Oct 11 meeting

Mark McLoughlin markmc at redhat.com
Fri Oct 11 14:40:54 UTC 2013


Todd, Monty, Simon, Tim, Rob, Troy, Jonathan and I had a call today for
over an hour

I won't attempt to fully summarize the discussion, so fill in anything I

  - general consensus (AFAICT) that we should move forward with 
    recommending a change to the system

  - a feeling that the board should recommend a particular system and 
    not put the choice of system up for a vote

  - STV and some Condorcet variant were still the two contenders 

  - there is a risk that any alternate system to could prove to make 
    the process of obtaining non-profit status more difficult, 
    particularly with Condorcet (it's not used by other orgs, harder to 
    explain, etc.)

  - another risk is that if someone successfully challenged an 
    election, the board would be invalid and unable to make decisions. 
    In other words, a system that is open to challenge could have very 
    serious consequences

  - the arguments in favour of STV, then, centred around these risks 
    and that it's a vast improvement in its own right

  - the arguments in favour of Condorcet largely centred around 
    consistency with the "technical community" elections and that we 
    know how to run these elections

  - we also had some discussion about timing. Some preference expressed 
    for pushing ahead quickly and having a vote which coincides with 
    the summit in an attempt to get more turnout. Others fear that that 
    strategy could backfire.


More information about the Elections-committee mailing list