Received: from localhost ([::1]:34121 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1)
	(envelope-from <llg-members-bounces@lojban.org>)
	id 1Y3ZJz-0007Po-Fr; Tue, 23 Dec 2014 15:56:59 -0800
Received: from mail-ob0-f172.google.com ([209.85.214.172]:52721)
 by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
 (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from <gusni.kantu@gmail.com>)
 id 1Y3ZJw-0007P9-1J
 for llg-members@lojban.org; Tue, 23 Dec 2014 15:56:57 -0800
Received: by mail-ob0-f172.google.com with SMTP id va8so27471307obc.3
 for <llg-members@lojban.org>; Tue, 23 Dec 2014 15:56:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :content-type; bh=gSx9w2QDy8PL9e/bLJAXSV8IFByHb/S6hB7+2Vcw964=;
 b=GH8fWDDTpHCvBKxtn6LL5s+mtW6LpVMSZYZxSAmPblaTMWh7+ZaeMD2Vb19DOjYnqA
 UtadwUu1J/LypiTdyVetA2sTIiVxgvTFkT9G/tXT8/SBfqmzDqqxrmgmh5/+mlBSHuWQ
 hCxAWz3O3HttqefKhgHBzyazURtpPMyCWNAnIhFm3hfnl2RiYiWgfOVx6o+OzGXbC4ty
 xQKgqo49yBy63X84584MEBjeM06awnTDXaLNeoncGf6NFQBKdzJcTjGex4sFEdOY0qWd
 MSS98NS+FsA2hfzK8bqShfUaye3tQuiNxRl6HTFbFfmCNN+vHus7wzHKHeJYIydOTcrM
 niJA==
X-Received: by 10.182.241.133 with SMTP id wi5mr17912085obc.10.1419379009309; 
 Tue, 23 Dec 2014 15:56:49 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.76.74.38 with HTTP; Tue, 23 Dec 2014 15:56:28 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20141223202825.GG23747@mercury.ccil.org>
References: <92268044-81E3-4593-980C-4F04280136CD@gmail.com>
 <CAP=UV6p=W=sRQg3a0dPwkun-eBf6uJARR4j4pgTVnHy80q5NyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <5499AB82.7040606@lojban.org> <20141223193533.GF23747@mercury.ccil.org>
 <CAP=UV6qm11ZcryM-5FPfBrmE2vjAEL4emry73ePbX=payNakrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20141223202825.GG23747@mercury.ccil.org>
From: guskant <gusni.kantu@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 08:56:28 +0900
Message-ID: <CAO1AUJPwoi11dZfPxxBTOTa1AsHyztU-840MJknhW3mOxs-33A@mail.gmail.com>
To: llg-members@lojban.org
X-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--)
X-Spam_score: -2.0
X-Spam_score_int: -19
X-Spam_bar: --
Subject: Re: [Llg-members] Board of Directors election; recess
X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: <llg-members.lojban.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/options/llg-members>,
 <mailto:llg-members-request@lojban.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/private/llg-members/>
List-Post: <mailto:llg-members@lojban.org>
List-Help: <mailto:llg-members-request@lojban.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members>,
 <mailto:llg-members-request@lojban.org?subject=subscribe>
Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org

That is approval voting. In general, range voting (also called score
voting) is better.
http://scorevoting.net/BayRegsFig.html

Actually, the current voting is to select two non-board members
(regarding Robin as to be un-selected and Bob to be selected.) If
simply selecting seven board members, I don't oppose myself to
approval voting. However, if four among seven board members are
possibly un-selected, I don't think approval voting could bring a
reasonable result.

For range voting, there is an easy and useful formatting to copy and paste:
https://docs.google.com/a/electology.org/forms/d/15v_mpDXU3HdRTENCyMtcODNqSXNzX3jL7TQSEyLF04Y/edit

mu'o

_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@lojban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members