On a different note...

Regarding the switch from approval voting to STV (or whatever) what I think is missing the most is a clear statement setting out the reasons for the change (i.e. what's broken and how would this change fix it).

I've also suggested a tweak to the EGM motion on the page (hope this is ok to do there)

Lastly, we could do with pencilling in a date for the EGM - how about coinciding with the board meeting 9-10 February 2013 - and aim to do it by electronic voting as much as possible.

Regards,

Andrew

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:26 PM, James Farrar <james.farrar@gmail.com> wrote:

OK, here's a very quick first draft of the motion and election rules for STV.

http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:LondonStatto/Proposed_EGM_Motion_on_Voting_System

http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:LondonStatto/Proposed_STV_Election_Rules

Thoughts, questions, suggestions all gratefully received. I'm not at work tomorrow so will do my best to monitor email/talk pages.

J.

On 17 September 2012 23:03, James Farrar <james.farrar@gmail.com> wrote:

Certainly my sense of the various discussions over the past 18 months is that there's near-consensus on STV as the best alternative to the current system. I intend to draft a motion with new election rules for STV; if anyone has other systems they'd like to put forward I'll be happy to draft election rules for them.

However, if we have more than two systems to choose between, we then have to decide which system to choose to decide which system we use...

On 17 September 2012 22:54, rexx <rexx@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

The problem probably lies with the volume of business on each board meeting agenda. We're only just keeping up with the business, and as much as I'd like to see a constructive discussion and a positive decision made on the future election process, I personally won't find the time in the near future to organise an EGM.

I'm encouraged by James' offer, and the more volunteers we have who would be willing to devote some time into defining the parameters for discussion (maybe a proposer and seconder for a resolution?), or suggesting possible timescales and venues for an EGM, the easier it gets to fulfil our commitment to having a new process in place by the next AGM.

All contributions are welcome.

--
Doug

On 17 September 2012 22:24, James Farrar <james.farrar@gmail.com> wrote:

Now that I am no longer in the process of getting married, I can start making some progress on this.

On Sep 17, 2012 9:48 PM, "Chris Keating" <chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 9:37 PM, Lodewijk <lodewijk@effeietsanders.org> wrote:
Chris, if I may at least ask for a very short clarification of the no: are you confirming there has been no communication/decision on the issue on board level, or do you confirm there will be no such EGM (as far as the board is concerned)?

There has been no progress. :-)

Personally I would quite like some progress, and think we ought to use STV - it would be great if people could get drafting resolutions.

Thanks,

Chris

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

--
Andrew Turvey
--
07403 216 991
@AndrewTurvey

http://www.facebook.com/andrew.turvey

http://en.wikipedia.org/User:AndrewRT

http://englishwikipedian.blogspot.co.uk/