Re: [council] Voting on first round

[Amadeu Abril i Abril <Amadeu@nominalia.com>]

Richard Lindsay wrote:
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> I would like to offer an idea to perhaps break the impasse
> between Raul and Amadeu concerning actually electing
> someone on the first round of voting.  So far we 12 nominees
> and only 5 accepted nominations.  I would like to propose
> that if there are more nominees (accepted) than members
> voting, that we use the first round of voting to reduce the
> pool.  If there are less than the number of voting NC reps,
> if there is a nominee who receives more than 10 votes (and
> it is not a tie) that we can elect that person.

Rcihard,

I don't think there is such impasse. But anyway...

A) We decided that we wre using the convnetion-style system, whereby,
as we have three eats to fell and GD to achieve, we were running three
consecutive elections for each director.
B) Electing a single director thru this system it is most preferable
to cast only one vote by each elector. Specially because we decided to
go thru simple majority (ie, 10 votes) If each electors cast, say,
three votes, more than one, concretely FIVE naominees can gahter more
than 10 vots at a single round. 
C) In such case, we could decide to elect the one with more votes, or
go for a new round in cse of ties. Nut we should not neglect the fact
that we would be depriving form election nominees who had aciueved the
required majority.... Simnply be ause we would be mixing apples with
pears. Ie, differnt and incompatible electoral systems and constraints.
D) I was the one proposing a first round with multiple (three) votes.
The resasons were
* Alliowing some likely candidates but not ·first horses· to gather
some support and remain in the run for successive elections
* Poll the NC and show the relative support for each nominee, thereby
facilitating convergence and shrotening the process

But, as I have explained, multiple votes and single seat provision
don't go well toghether. Raul and Dennis have expressed their
willingness to have a first round ·with election·. Denbnis has changed
his mind after my explanation. Raul has not. If people really feels
that they don't want a first round in the situation I described, then
I withdraw my proposal and we start the elections directly. With one
vote each, of course. Not three.

In any cse this will not chnge the elecotral system itself, as this
was simply a preliminary round. It does not hcange the core or even
the time schddule already presented. Your proposal, Richard, does,m
and introduces further complications and assumptions about something
that is completly our of our contol or even knwoledge until the last
minute: the real number of nominees.

Amadeu