Final proposed Board resolution for Board elections voting system

[Filipus Klutiero]

Thank you Ian. Here are my remarks.

On 2017-03-08 06:43, Ian Jackson wrote:
> [...]
>
> Ian.
>
>
> WHEREAS
>
> 1. SPI should elect its Board using a roughly-proportional voting
>     system.  Condorcet is good for single-winner elections but is
>     seriously lacking in proportionality in multi-winner elections such
>     as SPI's Board Elections.

Scrap this. It is superfluous and misleading (Condorcet can be fine in multi-winner elections; if this remark is based on more than how Condorcet is currently used by SPI, please elaborate).

>
> 2. SPI is not equipped to effectively design or analyse voting
>     systems.  We wish to adopt a system widely used elsewhere, and
>     which is recommended by civil society organisations specialising in
>     voting reform.
>
> 3. The Single Transferrable Vote is the only proportional voting
>     system, suitable for SPI, which meets these criteria.

The statement that STV is a proportional voting system is quite wrong.

>
> 4. The Scottish STV variant is clearly specified; we have an
>     established and stable Free Software implementation of it; and it
>     is straightforward to (re)implement.  Other STV variants appear to
>     lack some of these good properties.
>
> 5. Ian Jackson has offered to help with the implementation of STV for
>     SPI.
>
> THEREFORE THE SPI BOARD RESOLVES
>
> 6. Future elections to the SPI Board will be counted according to the
>     Scottish Single Transferrable Vote.  Scottish STV will also be used
>     by SPI for any other multi-winner election.
>
> 7. Specifically, the algorithm to be used is that specified in
>     Rules 45-52 of the Scottish Local Government Elections Order
>     2007 (a UK Statutory Instrument):
>        http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ssi/2007/42/schedule/1/part/III/crossheading/counting-of-votes/made
>
> 8. The practical implementation will be by means of software; for
>     example, perhaps the openstv package in Debian.  The choice of
>     software is up to the Secretary.  However, any differences between
>     the Rules in the Order, and whatever software implementation is
>     chosen, are to be resolved in favour of the Rules.
>
> 9. The SPI Secretary is requested to liase with Ian Jackson, so that
>     the necessary changes to SPI software and infrastructure can be
>     identified and implemented.

Typo "liase"


-- 
Filipus Klutiero
http://www.philippecloutier.com