Re: Call for votes for the debian project leader election 2002
On Mar 27, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> The discussion after last year's vote on this topic seemed to lead to a
> concensus that we should treat any unmarked choices as being of equal
> preference, at a preference level below any marked entries.
1. The method is called Condorcet, even though we all want to call it
"concorde." (Not correcting Bdale here :-)
2. According to http://electionmethods.org/CondorcetEx.htm :
The basics of Condorcet voting are best illustrated by
example. Suppose an election has four candidates designated A, B,
C, and D. Each voter ranks the candidates in order of
preference. For example, the vote (B,D,C) ranks B first, D second,
and C third. The last choice is implied. Voters are not required to
fully rank the entire list. For example, the vote (D,B) indicates
that the voter has no preference between A and C.
The implication of this statement is that we should treat (example
chosen so as not to reveal any bias toward/against any candidate :-):
Branden
Raphael
Bdale
1 None of the Above
as NA > (Branden = Raphael = Bdale)
(where > is "is preferred to" and = is "expresses no preference between")
Further, the "interactive demo" at
http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/politics/condorcet-front.html implies
that valid votes do not have to rank all candidates.
(This would be simpler if we had gone back and fixed the voting
procedure in the constitution a while back... oh well.)
Chris
--
Chris Lawrence <lawrencc@debian.org> - http://www.lordsutch.com/chris/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: