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

Re: Call for Consensus - "Use 'Schulze STV' for voting"

From: David Singer <singer@mac.com>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 12:01:39 +0200
Cc: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-id: <34730AB8-D961-463C-84B6-AB5D83FE6182@mac.com>
To: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
I think that this call is way premature, and that the Schulze method is close to incomprehensible for the average voter. That their voting is simple does not reassure that they trust the method.

Which leads to another problem/hypothesis:  the optimization level of a voting system seems inversely proportional to its comprehensibility.

We havenít even managed (a) done any analysis of any real data or (b) to agree we ought to change.

On May 16, 2014, at 2:02 , Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote:

> Hi,
> this issue has run around for a long time. This is a first attempt to record a *consensus* among this group, on the following proposition:
> For elections where there is more than one candidate to be chosen, such as TAG and AB elections, W3C should adopt the Schulze method of determining the winners as described in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_STV
> Please vote in reply to this thread, before May 30. I will tally the results on 1 June (although they will be public, so anyone else can do so too).
> Please do not reply to this thread *except* to vote.
> Silence will be considered assent to any consensus position, without prejudice to other preferences. (In english, not voting means "I don't really care right now").
> cheers
> Chaals
> -- 
> Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
>      chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com

Dave Singer

Received on Friday, 16 May 2014 10:02:12 UTC

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