Some quick analysis of the tally sheet: First preference votes: 152 Anthony 122 Steve 75 Andreas 70 Jeroen 48 Bill 9 Ari 4 Ted 14 NOTA (that counts 48 votes that ranked two or more options equal first multiple times) Using STV (aka IRV, which .au uses for its elections) instead of Condorcet to get the result, gives me eliminations in the following order: 8. Ted (4 votes) 7. Ari (9 votes) 6. NOTA (14 votes) 5. Bill (57 votes) 4. Jeroen (93 votes) 3. Andreas (121 votes) with the end result being me beating Steve by 6 votes, at 237 v 231. That's not really legitimate STV since when a vote ranks two candidates equally I count it towards both totals, which is why 231+237 = 468 which is more than the total number of votes (421), but it's the best we can do, I think. So, by the looks of things, we get the same result with either American-style voting (only the first ranked candidate counts) or Australian-style (preferential, but eliminations rather than pairwise comparisons). Approval voting (against NOTA) would result in: 344 Steve 339 Anthony 321 Andreas 319 Jeroen 294 Bill 158 Ari 73 Ted Similar result if you consider equal to NOTA as "approval", except that in that case Jeroen and Andreas tie. Interestingly, approval voting (against NOTA) would've given a different result last year too, with me and Matthew Garrett beating Branden (though who exactly won depended on which method of defining "approval" you choose). Though, again, I don't really think people would've voted the same way if that was the system we used. (cf http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2005/04/msg00039.html) If I remember how my script works well enough to use it correctly, the "clone" candidates (ones that a lot of voters rank next to each other) were: 326 votes (77%), Ari and Ted 269 votes (64%), Jeroen and Andreas 260 votes (61%), Ari and Bill 247 votes (59%), Jeroen and Steve 244 votes (58%), Steve and Anthony 228 votes (54%), Steve and Andreas 220 votes (52%), Andreas and Bill 217 votes (52%), Anthony and Andreas This year, 338 votes were unique in meaning, with an additional 12 unique in expression (eg, "1-------" vs "12222222"), leaving 71 voters who voted exactly the same as someone else, and 83 who ordered the candidates in one of the 36 orderings that more than one person used. The most common orderings were: 6 V: 22222221 (NOTA, everyone) 4 V: 33313332 (Anthony, NOTA, everyone) 4 V: 22212222 (Anthony, everyone) 3 V: 47213856 (Anthony, Steve, Andreas, Jeroen, Bill, NOTA, Ari, Ted) 3 V: 33123333 (Steve, Anthony, Everyone) 3 V: 22221223 (Andreas, NOTA, everyone) No other ordering had more than two people vote for it. (You can do the maths yourself, but that leaves 30 pairs of people who voted in the same way) How deeply did people express preferences? 0 Didn't express any preferences (all options equal) 16 Only had two different preferences (eg, 11111112) 29 Three preferences 50 Four preferences 48 Five preferences 50 Six preferences 51 Seven preferences 177 Full preferences (every option ranked differently) Apparently two people voted the outcome we actually got: V: 37213845 7ecd14e14664e97b71ed6fd6ae9e3289 V: 36213745 9df7140f924e1aba6d7022604a60db5c Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature