From: [...] Peter Crowther Sent: 11 January 2006 23:18 Subject: [Elections] A concrete proposal for registering voters andconducting the elections
Twenty hours on and no reaction. That has to be some kind of a record for something specifying a system that registers candidates, registers voters and handles the voting process.
No comments? Nobody willing to say "I like it", or "I like it, but..." or "I think it sucks"? If we don't get *some* dialogue going, we're going to have real problems if someone decides to challenge any mechanism we pick.
- Peter
I'm trying to be laid-back here and let Benjamin, Masashi, Daniel or Lex comment first.
So I'll stay quiet a bit longer (cough sounds good to me cough)
On 1/12/06, Peter Crowther Peter@ozzard.org wrote:
From: [...] Peter Crowther Sent: 11 January 2006 23:18 Subject: [Elections] A concrete proposal for registering voters andconducting the elections
Twenty hours on and no reaction. That has to be some kind of a record for something specifying a system that registers candidates, registers voters and handles the voting process.
No comments? Nobody willing to say "I like it", or "I like it, but..." or "I think it sucks"? If we don't get *some* dialogue going, we're going to have real problems if someone decides to challenge any mechanism we pick.
- Peter
Elections mailing list Elections@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/elections
Seriously though, I'm holding off on commenting in detail on Peter's concrete proposal, because I'd like the team to reach a consensus about it first.
On 1/12/06, Brent Vukmer brent.vukmer@gmail.com wrote:
I'm trying to be laid-back here and let Benjamin, Masashi, Daniel or Lex comment first.
So I'll stay quiet a bit longer (cough sounds good to me cough)
On 1/12/06, Peter Crowther Peter@ozzard.org wrote:
From: [...] Peter Crowther Sent: 11 January 2006 23:18 Subject: [Elections] A concrete proposal for registering voters andconducting the elections
Twenty hours on and no reaction. That has to be some kind of a record for something specifying a system that registers candidates, registers voters and handles the voting process.
No comments? Nobody willing to say "I like it", or "I like it, but..." or "I think it sucks"? If we don't get *some* dialogue going, we're going to have real problems if someone decides to challenge any mechanism we pick.
- Peter
Elections mailing list Elections@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/elections
This has the advantages mentioned below. Disadvantages of this proposal as I see them, compared to implementing the system proposed on minnow: 1. The voters list is maintained manually. This implies mistakes, duplicated work and the usual. The process of gathering them needs to be repeated before every vote or at least every so often. 2. The issues and proposals are maintained manually. I expect that this will result in the issues and proposals being determined in mailing lists, instead of being posted and then adjusted, with all the disadvantages of that medium. 3. If this is used as a temporary solution, then it is different enough from any permanent solution to create transition pain, and slow down adoption of a permanent solution.
Overall, this proposal will allow an election to happen fast, and will probably delay the overall process of introducing decentralized decision making.
So how about this - we start implementing a system, do all the required (non technical) parts related to the elections without specifying how voting will take place (just tell people to think of an order), and if we see the implementation of a complete voting system is delayed too much, fall back on CIVS.
Daniel
Brent Vukmer wrote:
Seriously though, I'm holding off on commenting in detail on Peter's concrete proposal, because I'd like the team to reach a consensus about it first.
On 1/12/06, Brent Vukmer brent.vukmer@gmail.com wrote:
I'm trying to be laid-back here and let Benjamin, Masashi, Daniel or Lex comment first.
So I'll stay quiet a bit longer (cough sounds good to me cough)
On 1/12/06, Peter Crowther Peter@ozzard.org wrote:
From: [...] Peter Crowther Sent: 11 January 2006 23:18 Subject: [Elections] A concrete proposal for registering voters andconducting the elections
Twenty hours on and no reaction. That has to be some kind of a record for something specifying a system that registers candidates, registers voters and handles the voting process.
No comments? Nobody willing to say "I like it", or "I like it, but..." or "I think it sucks"? If we don't get *some* dialogue going, we're going to have real problems if someone decides to challenge any mechanism we pick.
- Peter
Elections mailing list Elections@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/elections
Elections mailing list Elections@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/elections
Hi,
I also think the proposed system is good in a short-term basis, but it would be harder to maintain the voters' list if votings occur many times.
Ideally, voters' list should be automatically created, importing SqP, Squeak-Ja, and other community lists.
2006/1/19, Daniel Vainsencher daniel.vainsencher@gmail.com:
This has the advantages mentioned below. Disadvantages of this proposal as I see them, compared to implementing the system proposed on minnow:
- The voters list is maintained manually. This implies mistakes,
duplicated work and the usual. The process of gathering them needs to be repeated before every vote or at least every so often. 2. The issues and proposals are maintained manually. I expect that this will result in the issues and proposals being determined in mailing lists, instead of being posted and then adjusted, with all the disadvantages of that medium. 3. If this is used as a temporary solution, then it is different enough from any permanent solution to create transition pain, and slow down adoption of a permanent solution.
Overall, this proposal will allow an election to happen fast, and will probably delay the overall process of introducing decentralized decision making.
So how about this - we start implementing a system, do all the required (non technical) parts related to the elections without specifying how voting will take place (just tell people to think of an order), and if we see the implementation of a complete voting system is delayed too much, fall back on CIVS.
Daniel
Brent Vukmer wrote:
Seriously though, I'm holding off on commenting in detail on Peter's concrete proposal, because I'd like the team to reach a consensus about it first.
On 1/12/06, Brent Vukmer brent.vukmer@gmail.com wrote:
I'm trying to be laid-back here and let Benjamin, Masashi, Daniel or Lex comment first.
So I'll stay quiet a bit longer (cough sounds good to me cough)
On 1/12/06, Peter Crowther Peter@ozzard.org wrote:
From: [...] Peter Crowther Sent: 11 January 2006 23:18 Subject: [Elections] A concrete proposal for registering voters andconducting the elections
Twenty hours on and no reaction. That has to be some kind of a record for something specifying a system that registers candidates, registers voters and handles the voting process.
No comments? Nobody willing to say "I like it", or "I like it, but..." or "I think it sucks"? If we don't get *some* dialogue going, we're going to have real problems if someone decides to challenge any mechanism we pick.
- Peter
Elections mailing list Elections@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/elections
Elections mailing list Elections@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/elections
Elections mailing list Elections@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/elections
-- [:masashi | ^umezawa]
elections@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Brent Vukmer -
Daniel Vainsencher -
Masashi UMEZAWA -
Peter Crowther