[maemo-community] Proposed referenda on election processes

[From: Dave Neary]

Hi Andrew,

I will be setting up 3 separate elections for these, one per question. I
would love to merge them all into one, but I'm afraid I don't know how
to do that with this system. It'd be a one-off for-this-election hack
(which might not be a bad thing?)

If 3 elections are acceptable, we can initialise the temp tokens, filter
the electorate on the 3 month rule & 10 karma rule (is that correct?),
send out the emails and have the election over the next week and a half.

Cheers,
Dave.



Andrew Flegg wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Following on from the
> <http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-community/2009-January/002918.html>
> earlier
> <http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-community/2009-January/002947.html>
> threads, I propose *THREE* referenda for debate during the next week:
> 
>    1. Voting requirements for the NEXT election.
>    2. Voting requirements for N+1 & future elections.
>    3. Vote counting system for future elections.
> 
> 
> Here's the detail of each with reference to the changes needed to:
> 
>   http://wiki.maemo.org/Community_Council#Election_Process
> 
> 
> *Referendum #1: Eligibility for the next election only*
> *a)* 25 karma minimum and 3 month old account (status quo)
> 
> Item #3 remains as "Only community members who have had maemo.org
> <http://maemo.org> accounts for over 3 months, and have karma of 25 or
> above, may vote."
> 
> *b)* Karma ignored, account age ignored (council preferred option)
> 
> Item #3 becomes "Only community members who have had maemo.org
> <http://maemo.org> accounts for over 3 months, and have karma of 25 or
> above, may vote. /(Exception for first two elections: community members
> who have maemo.org <http://maemo.org> accounts for over 3 months may
> vote - no karma requirement)/"
> 
> This option is preferred by the Maemo Community Council to encourage a
> greater participation and uptake of maemo.org <http://maemo.org>
> accounts, before the talk.maemo.org <http://talk.maemo.org> transition
> and launch of the revamped website.
> 
> *c)* Neither of the above.
> 
> No change is made to the election process, and so please be aware this
> is a vote for option (a). However, it does allow you to indicate that
> you think neither were satisfactory.
> 
> 
> *Referendum #2: Eligibility for future elections*
> *a)* 25 karma minimum and 3 month old account (status quo)
> 
> Item #3 remains as "Only community members who have had maemo.org
> <http://maemo.org> accounts for over 3 months, and have karma of 25 or
> above, may vote."
> 
> *b)* 10 karma point minimum and 3 month old account
> 
> Item #3 becomes as "Only community members who have had maemo.org
> <http://maemo.org> accounts for over 3 months, and have karma of /10/ or
> above, may vote."
> 
> *c)* 10 karma point minimum or 12 month old account
> 
> Item #3 becomes as "Only community members who have had maemo.org
> <http://maemo.org> accounts for over /12/ months, /or/ have karma of
> /10/ or above, may vote."
> 
> *d)* Karma ignored, account age ignored
> 
> Item #3 becomes as "/Anybody with a maemo.org <http://maemo.org> account
> will be entitled to a vote./"
> 
> *e)* None of the above.
> 
> No change is made to the election process, and so please be aware this
> is a vote for option (a). However, it does allow you to indicate that
> you think none of these options is satisfactory.
> 
> 
> *Referendum #3: Voting system for council elections*
> *a)* No change ("first-five-candidates-past-the-post")
> 
> Item #4 remains "Each community member gets one vote.".
> Item #5 remains "The 5 nominees with the most votes are elected."
> 
> *b)* A single transferrable vote system (rank your preferred candidates)
> [council preferred option]
> 
> Item #4 becomes "Each community member /eligible to vote gets a single
> ballot./"
> Item #5 becomes "The 5 nominees /voted for most, as counted by a single
> transferrable vote system are elected./"
> 
> This option is preferred by the Maemo Community Council as being easiest
> to understand and gives a satisfactory outcome.
> 
> *c)* A reweighted range voting system (give *each* candidate a score 0-100)
> 
> Item #4 becomes "Each community member /eligible to vote gets a single
> ballot./"
> Item #5 becomes "The 5 nominees /ranked highest by a reweighted range
> voting system are elected./"
> 
> *d)* None of the above.
> 
> No change is made to the election process, and so please be aware this
> is a vote for option (a). However, it does allow you to indicate that
> you think none of these options is satisfactory.
> 
> 
> I suggest discussion and debate on these options until *Monday, 16th
> Feburary* - and then the referendum starts (debate for a month, then
> voting). According to the current rules, only people with karma of 25 or
> more may vote in the referendum.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Andrew
> 
> PS. Sorry for the HTML email, I wanted to use the formatting to clarify
> the changes.
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Flegg -- mailto:andrew at bleb.org <mailto:andrew at bleb.org>  |
>  http://www.bleb.org/
> Maemo Community Council member
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community at maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

-- 
maemo.org docsmaster
Email: dneary at maemo.org
Jabber: bolsh at jabber.org