Whereas 1 (Re: Final proposed Board resolution for Board elections voting system)

[Filipus Klutiero]

On 2017-03-08 17:23, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Josh berkus writes ("Re: Final proposed Board resolution for Board elections voting system"):
>>> 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.
>> Please cut this paragraph and replace.  As written, the paragraph is a
>> source of argument over factors which have little or nothing to do with
>> actually replacing the voting system.  Frankly, it reads like a partisan
>> vendetta against concordet.  I suggest instead:
>>
>> 1. SPI's concordet voting system is unique to our organization and
>>     has had several issues over the years.
> How about
>
>    1. SPI's voting system for Board elections is unique to our
>       organisation and has several problems; notably, a lack of
>       proportionality.
>
> ?

I have no real problem with this version, though since SPI has no political parties, I am not sure what proportionality means in our context. I am also hesitant about using language like "our" in a resolution. Suggestion:

SPI's voting system for Board elections is unique to SPI and has several problems; notably, a potentially suboptimal representativeness.


[...]

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