I went back and looked at the previous elections. We had about 40 people in the first election. The last election had several dozen who received nominations and 21 who accepted the nomination and stood for election. Jonathan On Oct 15, 2013, at 11:36 AM, Tim Bell <Tim.Bell at cern.ch> wrote: > > Simon, > > Could you clarify whether there is an STV system which does not require ranking all candidates (45 in the last round) and would require at least N votes (to ensure reasonable consideration) but does not require all candidates to be ranked ? > > This would avoid the “bullet vote” mentioned in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote, require a reasonable level of education by the electorate (i.e. not just choose the nearest affiliation but also allow a vote to be cast in a reasonable time by ranking your top M candidates where M > N) ? > > Tim > > > From: Simon Anderson [mailto:simon at dreamhost.com] > Sent: 15 October 2013 10:16 > To: elections-committee at lists.openstack.org > Subject: [Elections-committee] Draft STV Briefing Paper for Committee Review > > I've attached the draft briefing paper I've prepared summarizing the Single Transferable Vote (STV) system, and its benefits and drawbacks for consideration by the Board at the meeting on October 17. > > Look forward to discussing and refining it with you all today, on and after the election committee call. > > Best, > Simon Anderson > CEO, DreamHost > _______________________________________________ > Elections-committee mailing list > Elections-committee at lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/elections-committee -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/elections-committee/attachments/20131015/6d8dd4c0/attachment-0001.html>