Re: [wg-review] co-chair election system
> 2. it is perhaps's a little bit late, but we have a co-Chair election to
> carry and nominations to accept or refuse. To that end I think necessary to
> know what is the election system retained. We are supposed to proceed by
> consensus. You determined that you accepted a consensus by 51%, other said
> that we had to have 2/3rd. So will the co-chair be the Member getting the
> highest number of votes or should we use a more secure system as having a
> second ballot among the two Members getting the largest number of vice in a
> first ballot?
In New Zealand the conventional way of dealing with multiple candidates for a
sole position is preferential voting where people rank their candidates from
1st to last. It is a very easy system to use for voters, albeit somewhat
challenging for vote counters but there are excel spreadsheets which can do
Basically a candidate gets elected when they get 50% + 1 of the vote. If no
candidate gets this then the lowest polling candidate drops off and their votes
are redistributed to their next preference. This continues until someone makes
This avoids the situation where say four candidates stand and say one gets
elected by 26% of the vote because the vote against that person was split
between three similiar candidates. It is not only fairere for the voters but
also for the victor as they get a stronger mandate and can not be undermined by
suggestions they only had minority support.
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html