Editing
Meeting Notes 2010 12 21
(section)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== Consensus items === Board member election process rachel m gives short explanation of exciting board election issue. lief explains condorcet voting method. he thinks it is too complicated. he likes approval voting method - you vote for as many candidates as you want, and the most votes win. unranked voting. (question: why is that better?) he thinks this is simpler, less of a popularity contest. more noisebridgey. (shannon suggests a hack on the condorcet method that renders it equally good.) lief explains why this only eliminates popularity contests if everyone does it. He swears it been used in the "real" world, but has no cites. this way selects the people that the most people are ok with, vs. condorcet which selects the people that ????? if there is a tie we will need a runoff election. we need to consense on this next week if we are going to do it this time, it might delay elections. leif offers to proxy for anyone who wants to block if it means we can accelerate the process of adopting this while people are gone. we need to do the elections to follow nonprofit guidelines. we start discussing condorcet software upgrades. lief will write approval voting in python if we want to do it. shannon proposes a programming race between the two softwares. does anyone else care? only sort of. we could do a parallel vote to compare the methods. andy suggests we set a date but not a type of voting. aren't we going to modify ping's condorcet implementation anyway? we promised to change it because it picks only one person. we all agree we need to consense on the code we use. we will vote condorcet as long as the code is updated to elect five people so that it is available for review by the end of the year.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Noisebridge are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (see
Noisebridge:Copyrights
for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Log in
Request account
Namespaces
Page
Discussion
English
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Dig in!
Noisebridge
- Status: MOVED
- Donate
- ABOUT
- Accessibility
- Vision
- Blog
Manual
MANUAL
Visitors
Participation
Community Standards
Channels
Operations
Events
EVENTS
Guilds
GUILDS
- Meta
- Electronics
- Fabrication
- Games
- Music
- Library
- Neuro
- Philosophy
- Funding
- Art
- Crypto
- Documentation/Wiki
Wiki
Recent Changes
Random Page
Help
Categories
(Edit)
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information