Fellowship elections participation

Joe Awni joe.awni at gmail.com
Thu Apr 27 11:13:16 UTC 2017


I write to chime in my opinions on the topics in this thread. But, first i
find it necessary to preface this message with a meta-discussion.

--- Meta-Discussion: The messed-up election ---

With out alleging any impropriety actions beyond those mentioned in last
years election correspondence (
). I think it's widely agreed that many issues from all-time low voter turn
out to Paul Boddie's points (Ie: "a misleading process") combined to make
this a messed-up election.

anomalous - ajd.
1. deviating from or inconsistent with the common order, form, or rule;
irregular; abnormal:
Advanced forms of life may be anomalous in the universe.
2. not fitting into a common or familiar type, classification, or pattern;
He held an anomalous position in the art world.
3. incongruous or inconsistent.

I don't want to place blame exclusivity on the voting process, but IMO it's
the functional bottle-neck of this voting system. At the very least, this
statement from the wiki needs to be revised:

"Voting System: For the voting process we will use the Schulze method, a
popular voting system used by Debian, Wikimedia and others. It is a well
tested method and has proven to be resistant to voting anomalies."

Because the last two years elections have been anomalous!

--- End-Meta Discussion ---

I'm thinking in an Abstract way about what happened here. How can software
help us reach consensus and over-come issues that seem to be filibustered:
perhaps a new voting method?

I know the direction we need to be headed: engaging with more fellows by
showing them the positive effects of effective representation and
administration. The wiki is a huge tool for that. But, diverting people to
another site to vote is a detour that probably caused some people to lose
their vote. Is there a possibility to amend the wiki software with polling
function so fellows can voice their opinions on issues facing the

* Title change
This is the first time ive heard about the plan to transition from Fellows
to Supporters. Can i get linked to the aforementioned discussions? As long
as this title is preserved for the time-being, im open to considering other

As an idea to improve governance, why not include important decisions like
this as a referendum in the election?

On 27 April 2017 at 06:25, Franz Seidl <fseidl at f9s.eu> wrote:

> Hi Eric,
> in my opinion a downturn in voter participation is to be expected when
> the decision gets more complicated and time consuming. ("Oh, looks like
> this will take longer than expected. I don't have time for this now, I
> will do it in the evening..." - what could possibly go wrong?)
> Btw, do the absolute numbers point in the same direction?
> Regards,
> Franz
> Am 25.04.2017 um 13:00 schrieb Erik Albers:
> > Hi list,
> >
> > the Fellowship elections 2017 are over and the winner is Daniel Pocock.
> >
> >       https://fsfe.org/news/2017/news-20170425-01
> >
> > I like to thank all candidates for bringing life into this years
> election and
> > every voter for rewarding our candidates' activities by participating in
> the
> > elections.
> >
> > Unfortunately, we only had a participation of around 17 % which seems to
> be
> > the lowest participation since we record participation (2014). Many of
> the
> > list subscribers here have had the possibility to vote, so I like to ask
> for
> > explanations and possibilities how we can raise participation?
> >
> > The low amount of participation leaves me in particular wondering as
> this year
> > we had 7 candidates, each of them with a short representation in out
> wiki [1],
> > public hustings [2] and a reminder three days before the end of
> elections.
> >
> > However, former elections with only one (!) candidate and without
> reminders
> > and no public hustings (2016 and 2014) have had more participation ...
> >
> > Why is this? Please help us to understand what FSFE can do to make the
> > electiosn more appealing or raise participation?
> > Or help us to understand what was the reason that this year there was
> such a
> > low amount of participation?
> >
> > Thank you very much,
> >    Erik
> >
> > [1] https://wiki.fsfe.org/Activities/Election/FellowshipElection_2017
> > [2] https://wiki.fsfe.org/Activities/Election/FellowshipElection_2017#
> Hustings
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Discussion mailing list
> Discussion at lists.fsfe.org
> https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20170427/7d36e455/attachment.html>

More information about the Discussion mailing list