Re: Results for Project membership procedures
Lucas Nussbaum <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Thank you for the detailed analysis.
> You missed one point:
> Excluding votes where more than one
> option were ranked first, and counting only first choices, we get the
> following results:
> Option 1: 93
> Option 2: 90
> Option 3: 61
> Option 4: 12
> "Invalid" votes (more than one first choice): 20
> So, using plurality voting, we would have had a different result than
> the one we had with condorcet. This is actually quite rare: it
> happened with the debian-private declassification vote in 2005 (option 1
> was the plurality winner), and in the 2003 DPL election (Branden
> Robinson was the plurality winner).
I suspect this is because the obvious "please, dear deity, stop talking
about things constantly and just do them" vote ranks 3 above 2 above 1, so
I doubt many votes transferred from 3 to 1 when 3 was eliminated.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>