W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > June 2014

Re: Don't disclose election results

From: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 18:16:12 -0400
Message-ID: <CADC=+jdSPOPVaw=eocN54oDJhqTB2n7agZdVhTj3RxrrZa2iiA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Cc: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Charles McCathie Nevile <
chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote:

> On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 22:24:20 +0200, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On Jun 4, 2014, at 12:48 , Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>>  As for strategic voting, only about half of AC reps vote for all slots.
>>> 20-25% vote for just one. (The rest distributes in between.) So there is no
>>> doubt that it is going on.
>>>
>>
>> Really?  I can quite easily imagine there are AC Reps who only knew some
>> of the candidates, and by the time they excluded ones they knew and didn’t
>> like, found they had to accept a few so as to vote.  At least, that’s how I
>> imagine I got elected.  It might not be strategic, merely caution.
>>
>
> It would also be very poor logic, and carefully ignoring almost every link
> and explanation in the discussion of this topic over the last couple of
> years.
>
> I'm sure that is sometimes the case, but I suspect Robin's conclusion is
> correct, and that I (the only person I know who is on record as
> consistently voting strategically) and a couple of people who tell me that
> they do so are not the only ones.
>
>
I think that David's point is merely that it's not really necessarily
20-25% consistently strategically voting and I don't think that it is
illogical to offer that as just as likely an explanation... Seems almost
certain that this is the case for at least some partial votes and given the
kinds of numbers we are talking about here, even if it is 5 voters that
lessens the % substantially.

I support the idea, but I still think the form of the vote doesn't matter
quite as much as things like learning more about why so few vote, whether
they are aware, whether it's just not why they joined w3c, whether it's
their role in the company, how much data we can share in what form and to
whom.  So that we can figure out how to make things better all around.  I
seriously doubt that strategic voting has impacted in a negative way thus
far - it may well in the future, but I expect that in past few elections it
would likely only have expanded margins. I could be wrong, if we had some
more data maybe we'd know :)

FWIW, I think it's not necessary to ask w3c to do much but cooperate with a
volunteer force to get either one of those rolling... This is just a CG,
right?  The CG or even an individual could begin a study (volunteer time)
or create a ballot or whatever.  Might be hella easier..


>
> cheers
>
> --
> Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
> chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
>
>


-- 
Brian Kardell :: @briankardell :: hitchjs.com
Received on Thursday, 5 June 2014 22:16:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:10 UTC