behind the participation levels of previous years as measured
by percentage of developers participating..
- - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
THIRD AND FINAL CALL FOR VOTES FOR THE DEBIAN PROJECT LEADER ELECTION 2002
Votes must be received by 23:59
by percentage of developers participating..
- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
THIRD AND FINAL CALL FOR VOTES FOR THE DEBIAN PROJECT LEADER ELECTION 2002
Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on April 16th, 2002.
This vote is being conducted
behind the participation levels of previous years as measured
by percentage of developers participating..
- - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
THIRD AND FINAL CALL FOR VOTES FOR THE DEBIAN PROJECT LEADER ELECTION 2002
Votes must be received by 23:59
by percentage of developers participating..
- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
THIRD AND FINAL CALL FOR VOTES FOR THE DEBIAN PROJECT LEADER ELECTION 2002
Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on April 16th, 2002.
This vote is being conducted
, resulting in 238 valid votes from 227 unique
developers]
SECOND CALL FOR VOTES FOR THE DEBIAN PROJECT LEADER ELECTION 2002
Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on April 16th, 2002.
This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution.
You may see the constitution at http
, resulting in 238 valid votes from 227 unique
developers]
SECOND CALL FOR VOTES FOR THE DEBIAN PROJECT LEADER ELECTION 2002
Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on April 16th, 2002.
This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution.
You may see the constitution at
* Anthony DeRobertis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
>
> On Thursday, March 28, 2002, at 04:16 AM, David N. Welton wrote:
>
> >
> >All hail emperor me,
[..]
>
> And, lastly, and maybe most importantly, I propose a that we
> give Emperer David N. Welton a funny pointy hat. Can I either
> get a fir
>>"Marcelo" == Marcelo E Magallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcelo> Thanks for the clarification Manoj. I see the script does
Marcelo> work as discussed. My only remaining question is if the
Marcelo> script that parses the vote does indeed handle [ ]
Marcelo> correctly. In a previou
Folks,
I did not attribute the script that we are planning on using
for the vote counting to Anthony Towns. aj had sent me the script a
few weeks ago, but I had totally forgotten that he had done so. Since
the script did not contain an author name, I had forgotten who had
sent it in.
* Anthony DeRobertis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
>
> On Thursday, March 28, 2002, at 04:16 AM, David N. Welton wrote:
>
> >
> >All hail emperor me,
[..]
>
> And, lastly, and maybe most importantly, I propose a that we
> give Emperer David N. Welton a funny pointy hat. Can I either
> get a fi
>>"Marcelo" == Marcelo E Magallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcelo> Thanks for the clarification Manoj. I see the script does
Marcelo> work as discussed. My only remaining question is if the
Marcelo> script that parses the vote does indeed handle [ ]
Marcelo> correctly. In a previo
Folks,
I did not attribute the script that we are planning on using
for the vote counting to Anthony Towns. aj had sent me the script a
few weeks ago, but I had totally forgotten that he had done so. Since
the script did not contain an author name, I had forgotten who had
sent it in.
On Thursday, March 28, 2002, at 04:16 AM, David N. Welton wrote:
All hail emperor me,
In playing WarCraft II, there are a few things I've learned
about this that I'd like to pass along.
First, peasants are easy to rule, as long as you don't overwork
them too much. After all, they all cha
In light of the confusion this 'voting' business has caused, I see the
only answer, for the good of our project of course, is for me to seize
power and declare myself emperor for life. As we speak, my trusted
henchmen are moving to take control of key Debian infrastructure.
All hail emperor me,
In light of the confusion this 'voting' business has caused, I see the
only answer, for the good of our project of course, is for me to seize
power and declare myself emperor for life. As we speak, my trusted
henchmen are moving to take control of key Debian infrastructure.
All hail emperor me,
>> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This year we are using a new method of properly determining
> concordcet ballots using the Cloneproof SSD method. The script that
> calculates this is appended below.
Thanks for the clarification Manoj. I see the script does work as
d
>> "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1) Your candidate
> 2) None of the above
> 3 and 4) The other two
This is actually incorrect. That means you prefer one of the the other
two over the other, which might seem irrelevant, but under this voting
system makes a difference.
>>"Norbert" == Norbert Veber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Norbert> Thats very strange. So if I only consider one candidate
Norbert> vorthy of a vote, and fill in just one square, my vote means
Norbert> nothing? That dosent seem right :)
I would not say it meant nothing. It means that
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 11:38:59AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> This year we are using a new method of properly determining
> concordcet ballots using the Cloneproof SSD method. The script that
> calculates this is appended below.
"Condorcet" ballots. The history's this: way back in th
On Mar 27, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> The discussion after last year's vote on this topic seemed to lead to a
> concensus that we should treat any unmarked choices as being of equal
> preference, at a preference level below any marked entries.
1. The method is called Condorcet, even though we all w
>> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This year we are using a new method of properly determining
> concordcet ballots using the Cloneproof SSD method. The script that
> calculates this is appended below.
Thanks for the clarification Manoj. I see the script does work as
>> "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1) Your candidate
> 2) None of the above
> 3 and 4) The other two
This is actually incorrect. That means you prefer one of the the other
two over the other, which might seem irrelevant, but under this voting
system makes a difference
On Wed, 2002-03-27 at 00:06, Ben Collins wrote:
> I just want to remind everyone about how this voting works under the
> hood. You are better off not leaving options blank, for the simple
> reason that leaving it blank means your vote does not count against that
> option (the things you vote for ar
Norbert Veber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thats very strange. So if I only consider one candidate vorthy of a
> vote, and fill in just one square, my vote means nothing? That dosent
> seem right :)
The code Manoj posted seems to match your intuition rather than Ben's
description:
# On <>, ex
>>"Norbert" == Norbert Veber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Norbert> Thats very strange. So if I only consider one candidate
Norbert> vorthy of a vote, and fill in just one square, my vote means
Norbert> nothing? That dosent seem right :)
I would not say it meant nothing. It means that
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 11:38:59AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> This year we are using a new method of properly determining
> concordcet ballots using the Cloneproof SSD method. The script that
> calculates this is appended below.
"Condorcet" ballots. The history's this: way back in t
On Mar 27, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> The discussion after last year's vote on this topic seemed to lead to a
> concensus that we should treat any unmarked choices as being of equal
> preference, at a preference level below any marked entries.
1. The method is called Condorcet, even though we all
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Norbert Veber) writes:
> > One side affect of this is that if you only put a number next to one
> > person's name, and leave the rest blank, your vote pretty much means
> > nothing.
>
> Thats very strange. So if I only consider one candidate vorthy of a
> vote, and fill in ju
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, "Norbert" == Norbert Veber wrote:
Norbert> Thats very strange. So if I only consider one candidate vorthy
Norbert> of a vote, and fill in just one square, my vote means nothing?
Norbert> That dosent seem right :)
It makes sense if you understand how Concorde vot
Norbert Veber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thats very strange. So if I only consider one candidate vorthy of a
> vote, and fill in just one square, my vote means nothing? That dosent
> seem right :)
If that's what you think, then you rank them thus:
1) Your candidate
2) None of the above
3 an
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 05:07:31PM -0500, Norbert Veber wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 12:06:10AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > I just want to remind everyone about how this voting works under the
> > hood. You are better off not leaving options blank, for the simple
> > reason that leaving it bl
On Wed, 2002-03-27 at 00:06, Ben Collins wrote:
> I just want to remind everyone about how this voting works under the
> hood. You are better off not leaving options blank, for the simple
> reason that leaving it blank means your vote does not count against that
> option (the things you vote for a
Norbert Veber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thats very strange. So if I only consider one candidate vorthy of a
> vote, and fill in just one square, my vote means nothing? That dosent
> seem right :)
The code Manoj posted seems to match your intuition rather than Ben's
description:
# On <>, e
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Norbert Veber) writes:
> > One side affect of this is that if you only put a number next to one
> > person's name, and leave the rest blank, your vote pretty much means
> > nothing.
>
> Thats very strange. So if I only consider one candidate vorthy of a
> vote, and fill in j
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, "Norbert" == Norbert Veber wrote:
Norbert> Thats very strange. So if I only consider one candidate vorthy
Norbert> of a vote, and fill in just one square, my vote means nothing?
Norbert> That dosent seem right :)
It makes sense if you understand how Concorde vo
Norbert Veber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thats very strange. So if I only consider one candidate vorthy of a
> vote, and fill in just one square, my vote means nothing? That dosent
> seem right :)
If that's what you think, then you rank them thus:
1) Your candidate
2) None of the above
3 a
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 05:07:31PM -0500, Norbert Veber wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 12:06:10AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > I just want to remind everyone about how this voting works under the
> > hood. You are better off not leaving options blank, for the simple
> > reason that leaving it b
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 12:06:10AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> I just want to remind everyone about how this voting works under the
> hood. You are better off not leaving options blank, for the simple
> reason that leaving it blank means your vote does not count against that
> option (the things yo
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 12:06:10AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> I just want to remind everyone about how this voting works under the
> hood. You are better off not leaving options blank, for the simple
> reason that leaving it blank means your vote does not count against that
> option (the things y
Hi
>>"Marcelo" == Marcelo E Magallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcelo> I'd also appreciate a clarification regarding this,
Marcelo> preferably from Manoj himself. It is my intention to vote
Marcelo> that way and this time I'd like my vote to be counted in
Marcelo> the way I intended..
Hi
>>"Marcelo" == Marcelo E Magallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcelo> I'd also appreciate a clarification regarding this,
Marcelo> preferably from Manoj himself. It is my intention to vote
Marcelo> that way and this time I'd like my vote to be counted in
Marcelo> the way I intended.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 02:56:47AM -0300, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2002 00:06:10 -0500
> Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > One side affect of this is that if you only put a number next to one
> > person's name, and leave the rest blank, your vote pretty much means
>
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 02:56:47AM -0300, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2002 00:06:10 -0500
> Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > One side affect of this is that if you only put a number next to one
> > person's name, and leave the rest blank, your vote pretty much means
>> Gustavo Noronha Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If you want to select one person, and leave the rest equally, you
> > could put a "1" for the person (or thing) you like, and mark the
> > rest as "2".
> [...]
> unacceptable blank. Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't
> repeat
>> Gustavo Noronha Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If you want to select one person, and leave the rest equally, you
> > could put a "1" for the person (or thing) you like, and mark the
> > rest as "2".
> [...]
> unacceptable blank. Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't
> repea
On Wed, 2002-03-27 at 01:37, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> If I see it right, i will give my prefered candidate a 1, the second best a
> 2, then i will give "no candidate" a 3, and then it is optional if i leave
> the unwanted candidate empty or give it a 4.
As I understand Ben's message, leaving an op
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 12:06:10AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> I just want to remind everyone about how this voting works under the
> hood. You are better off not leaving options blank, for the simple
> reason that leaving it blank means your vote does not count against that
> option (the things yo
On Wed, 27 Mar 2002 00:06:10 -0500
Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One side affect of this is that if you only put a number next to one
> person's name, and leave the rest blank, your vote pretty much means
> nothing. If you want to select one person, and leave the rest equally,
> you cou
I just want to remind everyone about how this voting works under the
hood. You are better off not leaving options blank, for the simple
reason that leaving it blank means your vote does not count against that
option (the things you vote for are not considered against the thing you
left blank).
One
week. Acks shall
only be generated for correct parsing of the vote. Hopefully, the
process shall not mess up under live conditions.
The order of the candidates names was determined by writing them on e
piece of paper, and randomly selecting the pieces. ]
FIRST CALL FOR VOTES FOR THE DEBIAN
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 12:06:10AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> I just want to remind everyone about how this voting works under the
> hood. You are better off not leaving options blank, for the simple
> reason that leaving it blank means your vote does not count against that
> option (the things y
On Wed, 27 Mar 2002 00:06:10 -0500
Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One side affect of this is that if you only put a number next to one
> person's name, and leave the rest blank, your vote pretty much means
> nothing. If you want to select one person, and leave the rest equally,
> you co
I just want to remind everyone about how this voting works under the
hood. You are better off not leaving options blank, for the simple
reason that leaving it blank means your vote does not count against that
option (the things you vote for are not considered against the thing you
left blank).
On
week. Acks shall
only be generated for correct parsing of the vote. Hopefully, the
process shall not mess up under live conditions.
The order of the candidates names was determined by writing them on e
piece of paper, and randomly selecting the pieces. ]
FIRST CALL FOR VOTES FOR THE DEBIAN
54 matches
Mail list logo
