<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif;font-size:12pt">Hi Charlie,<br><br>In terms of improving proportionality why not keep this system (which I feel is not a bad one for electing a smallish board) why not introduce specific seats reserved for specific groups, for instance you could say that a minimum of 50% of seats are reserved for women so for example if 8 candidates achieve more than 50%+1 but only 3 of the winning candidates are women, then only 6 seats can actually be filled. Of course this raises issues, but if your organisation has already accepted that proportionality is important enough to dictate the election system then I don't see the problem.<br><br>Paddy.<br><div><br></div><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;"><br><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><font
face="Tahoma" size="2"><hr size="1"><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">From:</span></b> Charlie DeTar <cfd@media.mit.edu><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> jgilmour@globalnet.co.uk<br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Cc:</span></b> election-methods@lists.electorama.com<br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Fri, 18 February, 2011 0:38:44<br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [EM] electing a variable number of seats<br></font><br>On 02/17/2011 07:21 PM, James Gilmour wrote:<br>> Charlie<br>> I see two problems here.<br>> <br>> 1. You do not give the conditions under which the constitution of this organisation allows the number of board members to be<br>> varied.<br>> <br>> 2. More importantly, someone needs to define the purpose of this election a great deal better. Who would have the power to add one<br>> extra winner with a view to
"improving representation" and who would decide what "improved representation" might be? And just who<br>> exactly would have the power to reduce the number elected board members with a view to "eliminating polarizing candidates" and who<br>> would decide that the last winner was a "polarizing candidate" who should be excluded?<br><br>Valid points. Currently, the bylaws allow between 5 and 9 board<br>members. The current process is that each member is voted on<br>individually by simple majority of the voting members of the<br>organization. With this process, it's clear when the number changes: if<br>only 5 candidates receive 50+% of the vote, there are only 5 board<br>members; if 9, then there are 9. There is not currently any defined<br>process for what happens when (a) fewer than 5 people receive 50% of the<br>vote, or (b) more than 9 people do; in the history of the organization<br>it hasn't happened. This is
one aspect in which the current system is<br>broken<br><br>I share your concerns with allowing an individual to have the authority<br>to define when to grow or shrink the board. However, if there were a<br>voting system that could quantify questions like how well the electorate<br>is represented, or whether a candidate is polarizing, the system could<br>select the mix of candidates which would produce an optimal score<br>according to those metrics. If my language here sounds more like it<br>comes from a machine learning world, that's because that's closer to my<br>experience.<br><br>Thanks very much Markus and others for the sources and recommendations,<br>I'll look into those.<br><br>best,<br>Charlie<br>----<br>Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="http://electorama.com/em" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em</a> for list info<br></div></div>
</div><br>
</body></html>