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

I can't find any declaration for or against the proposal in this. Please  
clarify that if you want an opinion tallied.

cheers

Chaals

On Fri, 16 May 2014 12:01:39 +0200, David Singer <singer@mac.com> wrote:

> 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 haven’t 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
>
> singer@mac.com
>


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

Received on Friday, 16 May 2014 16:47:38 UTC