I am writing to ask all of you to think carefully when you vote.
The board election is very important and many good people are running.
But it is better for Wikipedia's future to keep a bad person off than to have the best people on.
There are three seats open. When you make your three choices if you think only to choose the best you risk making an opening for someone bad, so '''you must also consider who can win'''.
Look at the endorsements: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/Endorsements
It is clear that only some have the standing to keep a bad person off the board. So even if you know in your heart that someone else is better, you should not pick them because if you do your vote is WASTED.
If you have already voted and made the error of picking the wrong people you can still change your vote but you must do it right away before the election closes.
On 7/1/07, Søren Kiersted wisewisard@googlemail.com wrote: ...
There are three seats open. When you make your three choices...
You don't have to make three choices. It's approval voting, so you can vote for as many people as you like. If you're concerned about one bad person being on the board, you can vote for everyone else, not just the three you think can win.
Angela
On 6/30/07, Angela beesley@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/1/07, Søren Kiersted wisewisard@googlemail.com wrote: ...
There are three seats open. When you make your three choices...
You don't have to make three choices. It's approval voting, so you can vote for as many people as you like. If you're concerned about one bad person being on the board, you can vote for everyone else, not just the three you think can win.
Then your vote is diluted and carries less power to keep someone off, since many of the choices have no chance of winning. If you select only the most popular who are not bad your vote stayed focused.
2007/7/1, Søren Kiersted wisewisard@googlemail.com:
You don't have to make three choices. It's approval voting, so you can vote for as many people as you like. If you're concerned about one bad person being on the board, you can vote for everyone else, not just the three you think can win.
Then your vote is diluted and carries less power to keep someone off, since many of the choices have no chance of winning. If you select only the most popular who are not bad your vote stayed focused.
No, that's incorrect. Read the voting method before you make such statements. Simply speaking, the number of votes for each candidate is counted. Suppose you want to get A in and keep B out. If you vote just for A, A gets 1 vote from you, and B gets 0. If you vote for everyone but B, it's exactly the same.
Then your vote is diluted and carries less power to keep someone off, since many of the choices have no chance of winning. If you select only the most popular who are not bad your vote stayed focused.
No, that's incorrect. Read the voting method before you make such statements. Simply speaking, the number of votes for each candidate is counted. Suppose you want to get A in and keep B out. If you vote just for A, A gets 1 vote from you, and B gets 0. If you vote for everyone but B, it's exactly the same.
Exactly. It doesn't make any difference how many people you vote for, just who you vote for. Basically, you vote either Yes or No on each candidate. It's possible that voting for extra people will prevent your favourite candidate from winning, but voting for extra people can never cause a candidate you didn't vote for to win.
On 6/30/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
candidate. It's possible that voting for extra people will prevent your favourite candidate from winning, but voting for extra people can never cause a candidate you didn't vote for to win.
Voting for people who have little to no chance of winning is a lost chance to keep off the person you know is bad, a wasted vote.
People here seem to think that each person gets multiple votes, but that is not true. It would not be fair. You get one vote, and it says so on the voting page that only one vote is allowed per person no matter how many projects you are on.
Right now people who like five people, ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE but like ONE somewhat more than FOUR or FIVE will select only ONE, TWO and THREE so that their vote is not diluted with the result of FOUR being selected while ONE loses. But this thinking is WRONG. If ONE has little chance of winning, and SIX is the bad person, their vote may cause SIX to win. So instead they should look at the endorsements page and only vote for people who are good and who are likely to win. The omission of ONE will hurt no one if he is not likely to win, even if you know he is best.
That is why we had the pre-election in the first place.
People here seem to think that each person gets multiple votes, but that is not true. It would not be fair. You get one vote, and it says so on the voting page that only one vote is allowed per person no matter how many projects you are on.
You are misunderstanding what it says. The election is using Approval Voting (see the Wikipedia article), which means you can vote for as many of the candidates as possible. When it says you can only vote once, it means you can load the voting page and click submit once, you can select multiple candidates while on that page, though.
Have you actually tried clicking the "Vote" link (you can cancel and vote later if you haven't made up your mind yet)?
On 6/30/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
You are misunderstanding what it says. The election is using Approval Voting (see the Wikipedia article), which means you can vote for as many of the candidates as possible. When it says you can only vote once, it means you can load the voting page and click submit once, you can select multiple candidates while on that page, though.
Have you actually tried clicking the "Vote" link (you can cancel and vote later if you haven't made up your mind yet)?
I think you misunderstand it. You can go to the page and vote as many times as you want, only your most recent counts. Your earlier vote is stricken.
On 01/07/07, Søren Kiersted wisewisard@googlemail.com wrote:
On 6/30/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
You are misunderstanding what it says. The election is using Approval Voting (see the Wikipedia article), which means you can vote for as many of the candidates as possible. When it says you can only vote once, it means you can load the voting page and click submit once, you can select multiple candidates while on that page, though.
Have you actually tried clicking the "Vote" link (you can cancel and vote later if you haven't made up your mind yet)?
I think you misunderstand it. You can go to the page and vote as many times as you want, only your most recent counts. Your earlier vote is stricken.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
(found it)
"***___You may vote for as many candidates as you wish.____*** The three candidates with the most votes will be declared the winners. In the event of a tie, a run-off election will be held."
(emphasis mine)
On 6/30/07, Vee vee.be.me@gmail.com wrote:
(found it)
"***___You may vote for as many candidates as you wish.____*** The three candidates with the most votes will be declared the winners. In the event of a tie, a run-off election will be held."
(emphasis mine)
When I went it said: "it doesn't mean you have the right to vote twice"
Was it changed in secret?
On 01/07/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
People here seem to think that each person gets multiple votes, but that is not true. It would not be fair. You get one vote, and it says so on the voting page that only one vote is allowed per person no matter how many projects you are on.
You are misunderstanding what it says. The election is using Approval Voting (see the Wikipedia article), which means you can vote for as many of the candidates as possible. When it says you can only vote once, it means you can load the voting page and click submit once, you can select multiple candidates while on that page, though.
Have you actually tried clicking the "Vote" link (you can cancel and vote later if you haven't made up your mind yet)?
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
where the hell is the vote link anyway? i've looked and can't find one at all o.O
On 6/30/07, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Søren Kiersted wrote:
That is why we had the pre-election in the first place.
What pre-election?
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/Endorsements
Søren Kiersted wrote:
On 6/30/07, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Søren Kiersted wrote:
That is why we had the pre-election in the first place.
What pre-election?
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/Endorsements
In no way should that be viewed as a kind of pre-election. If only 12 endorsements are required, that's where it should stop. It should not be a place for any candidate's supporters to show their adherence to the herd instinct.
Ec
2007/7/1, Søren Kiersted wisewisard@googlemail.com:
On 6/30/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
candidate. It's possible that voting for extra people will prevent your favourite candidate from winning, but voting for extra people can never cause a candidate you didn't vote for to win.
Voting for people who have little to no chance of winning is a lost chance to keep off the person you know is bad, a wasted vote.
No, it is not.
People here seem to think that each person gets multiple votes, but that is not true. It would not be fair. You get one vote, and it says so on the voting page that only one vote is allowed per person no matter how many projects you are on.
But that vote can go to one, several or all candidates (although voting for all candidates would of course not influence the effect).
Right now people who like five people, ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE but like ONE somewhat more than FOUR or FIVE will select only ONE, TWO and THREE so that their vote is not diluted with the result of FOUR being selected while ONE loses.
Will they? I don't see why they would vote exactly three, and not one or five.
But this thinking is WRONG. If ONE has little chance of winning, and SIX is the bad person, their vote may cause SIX to win. So instead they should look at the endorsements page and only vote for people who are good and who are likely to win.
No. There is no harm done in ALSO voting for those who are good, but have no chance to win.
The omission of ONE will hurt no one if he is not likely to win, even if you know he is best.
The addition of ONE will also hurt no one.
Søren Kiersted wrote:
On 6/30/07, Angela beesley@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/1/07, Søren Kiersted wisewisard@googlemail.com wrote: ...
There are three seats open. When you make your three choices...
You don't have to make three choices. It's approval voting, so you can vote for as many people as you like. If you're concerned about one bad person being on the board, you can vote for everyone else, not just the three you think can win.
Then your vote is diluted and carries less power to keep someone off, since many of the choices have no chance of winning. If you select only the most popular who are not bad your vote stayed focused.
I'll reply to this post since it's the most obviously wrong of Søren's posts without being confusing.
Votes are not diluted.
I could invent a fictional voting method where you were right, where voting for A, B, C and D gave 1/4 of a point to each, and voting for A alone gave a whole 1 point to A. But that's not how it is.
Voting for A, B, C and D gives one whole point to each of them. Voting for A alone gives one point to A. I can say this with authority because I wrote the voting and tallying software that we are using.
So there is nothing harmful in voting for a candidate that you approve of, but believe has no chance of winning. As the Wikipedia article will tell you:
"The theoretically optimal tactic is to vote for those candidates whom you prefer to the expected outcome of the election (the average utility of the candidates weighted by their probabilities of victory)."
So if you think evil B will win (i.e. B is the expected outcome), and you would prefer anyone other than B, then you should vote for everyone except B.
-- Tim Starling
Angela wrote:
On 7/1/07, Søren Kiersted wisewisard@googlemail.com wrote: ...
There are three seats open. When you make your three choices...
You don't have to make three choices. It's approval voting, so you can vote for as many people as you like. If you're concerned about one bad person being on the board, you can vote for everyone else, not just the three you think can win.
Forgot the obligatory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_voting link. :)
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org