[Noisebridge-discuss] We are a winnar.

Leif Ryge leif at synthesize.us
Wed Jan 19 12:46:29 PST 2011


My friends, we have come to the end of a long journey. The Noisebridge 
members have spoken, and they have spoken clearly. A little while ago, I 
had the honor of calling Miloh, Rachel, Danny, Jof, and Al, to 
congratulate them -- please -- to congratulate them on being elected the 
next board of the hackerspace that we all love.

In a contest as long and difficult as this campaign has been, their 
success alone commands my respect for their ability and perseverance. 
But that they managed to do so by inspiring the hopes of so many 
millions of Noisebridgers who had once wrongly believed that they had 
little at stake or little influence in the election of a board of 
directors is something I deeply admire and commend them for achieving.

I urge all hackers who supported me to join me in not just 
congratulating them, but offering our next board our good will and 
earnest effort to find ways to come together, to find the necessary 
compromises, to bridge our differences, and help restore our prosperity, 
defend our security in a dangerous world, and leave our children and 
grandchildren a stronger, better hackerspace than we inherited.

Whatever our differences, we are fellow Noisebridgers. And please 
believe me when I say no association has ever meant more to me than that.

It is natural tonight to feel some disappointment, but tomorrow we must 
move beyond it and work together to get our hackerspace moving again. We 
fought -- we fought as hard as we could.

And though we fell short, the failure is mine, not yours.

I'd like to thank John McCain's speechwriters for helping me out here, 
and encourage viewers to stay tuned for the second half of this email 
which is of utmost importance.

On 01/18/2011 09:58 PM, Jason Dusek wrote:
 > #     Winner: Miloh
 > #     Winner: Rachel
 > #     Winner: Danny
 > #     Winner: JonL
 > #     Winner: Al
[...]
 > Candidates: Miloh Rachel Andy JonL JonM Danny Leif Jim Al
 >
 > # The following 16 ballots were cast:
 > 3 4 5 2 - - - - 1
 > 2 4 - 3 5 - - - 1
 > 1 2 - 1 - 1 - 2 2
 > 2 2 2 3 3 1 - 2 -
 > 1 2 5 8 7 6 4 3 9
 > 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 3
 > 7 1 8 1 - 9 7 8 7
 > 5 2 6 4 9 1 8 3 7
 > 2 4 - 1 - - - - 3
 > 4 1 - - - 2 5 3 -
 > 3 2 - 5 - - - 4 1
 > - - - - - - - - -
 > 1 1 - - - 1 1 1 -
 > 1 1 2 - 3 - - - 1
 > 4 6 3 1 7 8 5 9 2
 > 1 4 7 8 5 2 6 9 3

Just for fun, I totaled the 16 ballots as if we were using approval 
voting, and the result is somewhat different.

Disapprovals per candidate:
   1 1 7 4 8 6 8 5 4

Winners by approval voting:
Miloh & Rachel (15 approvals each)
Jof & Al (12 approvals each)
Jim (11 approvals)

Interestingly, while Danny was more preferred and thus a winner under 
the condorcet method that we actually used, Jim was approved of by one 
more person and thus would have beat him under approval voting.

Of course, had we actually been using approval voting, at least some 
people would almost certainly have voted differently. So, this is not 
really conclusive of anything.

Also, btw, the ballot listed as all dashes was mine and was not counted 
as I intended. I placed an X for every candidate, rather than a number, 
and after some disagreement the election operators (Jason D. and Steve 
D.) decided that it was invalid and then counted it as an empty ballot. 
Not that it would have changed anything, but, it does mean that Rachel 
and Miloh actually have 100% approval from the 16 members who voted last 
night (although they were two people's 6th and 7th choices).

I, for one, welcome our new duly-elected overlords!

~leif


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list