W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2012

Re: Form of proportional representation

From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 11:07:40 +0100
Message-ID: <50C705EC.9090202@w3.org>
To: Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com>
CC: Henry Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>
On 11/12/2012 08:58 , Karl Dubost wrote:
> Le 11 déc. 2012 à 16:48, Larry Masinter a écrit :
>>    http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2012/10/07-minutes#item02
> "ht: ask the AB to review the voting procedures to change them to a form of proportional representation"
> What does that mean?
> I don't know if the scribing captures what henry expressed.

I obviously can't speak for Henry, but I think this may have been 
somehow miscaptured because I don't really see how a typical 
proportional system could apply here (I also strongly doubt proportional 
systems scale down to as few voters as we have).

What we've discussed before is the problem of tactical voting. If 
there's someone you really want to see get elected, as an AC rep you're 
better off voting for that person only and not using your other votes, 
as that will increase that candidate's chance of winning. This distorts 
the truthiness of the vote since voters may have had a preference 
between other candidates as well, but it is not being expressed.

Now, mentioning voting procedures in an assembly of geeks can very 
easily degenerate into years of discussion over the relative demerits of 
obscure Condorcet variants. In order to avoid that, my proposal was that 
we use the preferential voting system already built into WBS (the W3C's 
balloting system) as "good enough" (and require that all options be 
filled out). It will never completely remove tactical voting, but it 
ought to decrease it sufficiently.

Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2012 10:08:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:18 UTC