[Elections-committee] Oct 11 meeting
Mark McLoughlin
markmc at redhat.com
Fri Oct 11 14:40:54 UTC 2013
Hi
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
missed.
- 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
discussed
- 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.
Mark.
More information about the Elections-committee
mailing list