Open Stack

> >>   1. *make a minor concession to proportionality* - while keeping the
> >>      focus on consensus, e.g. by adopting the proportional Condorcet
> >>      variant.
> > 
> > It would be interesting to see the analysis again, but in the past this
> > proved to not make much difference.
> 
> For the record, I just ran the ballots in CIVS "proportional mode" and
> obtained the same set of winners:
> 
> http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_88cae988dff29be6

Thanks for doing this Thierry,

Not surprising that it made no difference to the outcome this time,
given the smaller number of seats contested and the gap between the
first 6 and the trailing pack. IIRC the only previous election where
your analysis showed the proportional variant would have any impact
was the Oct 2013 contest for 11 seats, where the margins were tighter
in the lower preferences.

So in the absence of switching to simultaneous terms, adopting the
proportional variant of Condorcet is probably not worth the extra
conceptual complexity for the interested voter to digest.

Of course, we could just throw in the towel and cede the community
leadership to a deck of playing cards ;)

Cheers,
Eoghan