[Foundation-l] Volunteer Council - A shot for a resolution

Fri Mar 14 15:04:56 UTC 2008

On 14/03/2008, Yaroslav M. Blanter <putevod at mccme.ru> wrote:
> >>  But
>  >>  if it all goes to unrestricted general vote - none of these projects is
>  >>  going to be represented. Then only stewards/active members of big
>  >> projects
>  >>  have a chance to be elected, and we are back to the countless
>  >> lamentations
>  >>  about insufficient representation of the community.
>  >
>  > I'm not sure that's true. It depends on the voting system, but I
>  > expect there's a way we can get smaller projects represented through a
>  > general vote. Single Transferable Vote (or a variation of it) might
>  > work. While a candidate from a small project may not stand much of a
>  > chance, you'll still get a candidate from a similar project selected
>  > by a natural grouping of votes (rather than forcing certain projects
>  > together along arbitrary boundaries). If everyone from a group of
>  > small projects votes for someone from their project as first choice
>  > and people from the other projects in the group (this isn't a fixed
>  > group, just a naturally occurring collection of like minded voters) as
>  > their other choices, one of the candidates from that group is likely
>  > to get a seat.
>  >
>
> This is also an option, but I would not call this an "unrestricted vote"

Why not? In what way is it restricted?