[Mmwg] Important : procedure for runoff election

[Bertrand de La Chapelle]

Dear all,

Two points :

1) I wanted this important issue of voting mechanisms to be addressed and
this vote seemed like a good opportunity to test and discuss the respective
merits of the two possible modalities; I am happy with the support my
suggestion got, even if late
2) on a procedural matter, I did not want that one of the first choices we
had to make (ie : a voting procedure) to be decided without an explicit
discussion. This would have set a bad precedent for the working of this mmwg
group. This is why I brought up the issue again.

That said, I understand from a brief discussion with Avri this morning that
if we change the number of votes at that stage on the vote already prepared,
we need to reset and pay a new 40 bucks.

Therefore, for the sake of efficiency and moving forward, I am OK to get
along a traditional 1 vote for this specific case, under the provision that
the modalities I proposed are seriously discussed in the coming weeks.

Hope this will help us get our two chairs ready ASAP and at the same time
open a dscussion on an important aspect of any future setting up of
coordination groups, steering committees, etc....

So, at that stage, Jacqueline, let's keep the vote the way it is, unless it
can be changed to two votes without additional costs.

Bertrand

On 2/16/06, Jacqueline Morris <jam at jacquelinemorris.com> wrote:
>
> Tallying the discussion: so far I have seen:
>
> 2 for Bertrand's proposal
> 1 no preference
> 2  let's go ahead ASAP the way we are and get back to work on other things
>
> 1 vote as we are until someone gets 2/3
>
> Jacqueline
>
>
>
> On 2/16/06, Luc Faubert <LFaubert at conceptum.ca> wrote:
> >
> > Our charter says "Chairs can either be designated by consensus of the
> > MMWG or by a 2/3 vote." So if we want to go by the book, unless we can reach
> > consensus on another chair I think we should vote until another candidate
> > gathers 2/3 of the votes -- or change our charter.
> >
> > Now I'm not sure I understand Bertrand's proposal. What happens in the
> > case we have the following situation where V are voters and A, B and C the 3
> > candidates ?
> >
> > V ABC
> > 1 xx
> > 2  xx
> > 3 x x
> > 4 xx
> >
> >
> > - Luc Faubert
> > ISOC Québec
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: mmwg-bounces at wsis-cs.org on behalf of Jacqueline Morris
> > Sent: Thu 2006-02-16 07:14
> > To: Vittorio Bertola
> > Cc: mmwg at wsis-cs.org
> > Subject: Re: [Mmwg] Important : procedure for runoff election
> >
> >
> > Ok - sorry.
> > Can we have some discussion on this until the 18th, then?
> >
> >
> > On 2/16/06, Vittorio Bertola <vb at bertola.eu.org > wrote:
> >
> >         Bertrand de La Chapelle ha scritto:
> >         > Dear Jacqueline,
> >         >
> >         > I am a bit sad. I made a very simple and argumeted proposal
> > for this
> >         > second round, suggesting that we allow for two votes instead
> > of one
> >         > only. Justification is reiterated below in the copy of my
> > previous mail.
> >         >
> >         > Unfortunately, you are calling for a second round of elections
> > with the
> >         > traditional single vote rule, without any mention of the
> > alternative. I
> >         > suppose you and others simply did not notice my mail in the
> > flurry of
> >         > exchanges. This is OK . I trust you.
> >
> >         Actually, I thought that it was so clear that your suggestion
> > was a good
> >         one that it didn't need explicit support, but if it needs some,
> > here is
> >         mine.
> >         --
> >         vb.             [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org
> > ]<-----
> >          http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Prima o poi...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jacqueline Morris
> > www.carnivalondenet.com
> > T&T Music and videos online
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Jacqueline Morris
> www.carnivalondenet.com
> T&T Music and videos online
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmwg mailing list
> mmwg at wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mmwg
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/mmwg/attachments/20060216/0f05846b/attachment-0001.htm