[Foundation-l] Notice of the results of the WMF Board of Trustees election

[Ray Saintonge]

Congratulations to the three winners.  I look forward to meeting Frieda 
in Taipei.

Thomas Dalton wrote:

>It's a little unfortunate that 3 people missed out on a place by less
>than 40 votes. With a fairly low turnout the margin of error is quite
>high, so had a different 4170 people voted we may well have had a
>different result. I think this suggests that we need to work even
>harder next year to increase the turnout. That said, I am very happy
>with the choice (I believe I voted for 2 of the winners and the 3rd
>was a very close call).
>
That's aninteresting observation about the three people who missed out 
by less than 40 votes.

Other interesting observations:
    The top vote getter did so with only 40% of the votes.  IOW at least 
60% of the voters disapproved of all the candidates.

    There were 15540 votes on 4170 ballots; that's an average of 3.73 
votes per ballot.  This suggests to me that contrary to what Erik has 
suggested this still retains the deficiencies of strategic voting.  If 
possible it would be interesting to see how the ballots were distributed 
on a number of votes per ballot basis.

    I agree too that  there should be a limit on the number of 
endorsements.  The 12 minimum is fine, but the unlimited maximum created 
a kind of pre-vote situation that could be used in advance to show how 
much support a particular candidate might receive.  While there is a 
need for the endorsers to be eligible to do so,. the maximum number of 
endorsers should only be as much as is needed to ensure that there will 
be 12 valid endorsements.  Perhaps the election committee could answer 
how many endorsements usually needed to be checked before there were 12 
valid ones?  Were any of the nominees rejected as candidates 
specifically because of ineligible endorsements.

Ec