[EURO-Discuss] [EURO-ALS] Voting Porcedure

[Vittorio Bertola]

Nick Ashton-Hart ha scritto:
> 2) Nothing would prevent you from noting preferences for only one, or
> two, out of the three, and not setting a second or a third preference.
> So, the effect you might achieve would be the same.

First, let me state that I do not like this voting system at all. 
However, this was what was adopted in Lisbon by a meeting where most 
ALSes were present, including Christoph and Wolfgang (so not just ISOC 
chapters), so I think that, for the sake of closing this painful process 
which reminds me of the worst days of icannatlarge.com, we'd better live 
with it for the time being.

However, and this was discussed in Lisbon, there is a requirement that 
you rank ALL candidates. This is because, with this system, the best 
candidates are the ones whose sum of rankings is the lowest. So for 
example in this case:

Voter 1: 1. Candidate A, 2. Candidate B, 3. Candidate C
Voter 2: 1. Candidate B, 2. Candidate C, 3. Candidate A

the final result would be:

1. Candidate B = 3 points
2. Candidate A = 4 points
3. Candidate C = 5 points

However, if Voter 2 did not rank Candidate A (possibly because he/she 
thinks that A is a really bad person), and only stated two preferences, 
A would not get points and so the result would be:

1. Candidate A = 1 point
2. Candidate B = 4 points
3. Candidate C = 5 points

which is the exact opposite of what Voter 2 would have liked to get.

This is why there is the need to rank all candidates, none excluded... 
so that the ones you really don't like get a lot of points from you and 
sink down the list :-)
-- 
vb.                   Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu   <--------
-------->  finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/  <--------