On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 09:19:46AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> We have decided to have 2 GR at the same time. One deciding the creation
> of the soc-ctte and one deciding its membership.
<snip>
> - by default, every 2 years the project has to reapprove individually each
> member of the soc-ctte. This gives the project an opportunity to recall
> members who are judged as no more representative or whatever.
> Reapproving probably means having more ranking above NOTA than rankings
> below NOTA. Maybe we should make that ratio 66%.
Just nitpicking, but is our Condorcet method for running election
suitable for voting when an (ordered) set of result is expected? Isn't
it targeted at finding only one winner (if it exists)? Not a big
problem though: I guess if it's not suitable we can find an alternative
method, but I definitely don't want a ballot with all possible
permutation of resulting soc-ctte :-) Something to be looked for before
the election though, or maybe Manoj can enlighten all us out of the box.
( Sorry I can't look for the answer of the above by myself, but I'm
writing offline )
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what?
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
(15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the
(15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature