[Qgis-psc] [VOTE] Re: AGM voting: invalid votes

[Marco Bernasocchi]

hi all

On Sun, 3 May 2020, 08:03 Tim Sutton, <tim at kartoza.com> wrote:

> Hi
>
>
>
> On 3 May 2020, at 00:19, Nathan Woodrow <madmanwoo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> I was always under the assumption the votes are anonymous and IMO it
> should stay that way.    I feel like any votes for this kind of thing
> (positions of power etc) should always be anonymous to avoid 1) hurt
> feeling "I thought they liked me why didn't they vote for me" 2) people
> questioning other people's votes after the fact e.g bullying 3) if just
> feels off to me for this kind of thing.
>
> It's like when we vote here in Australia. We get marked off that we have
> voted before we vote and then we vote in a seperate section with no
> connection to name.  I know that doing this non electronically allows for
> this flow better, but I think we should look for options to allow that kind
> of thing.
>
> I know we are doing the best we can for now but if double votes and/or
> being voted for the different positions is a issue I think we should
> address that first before dumping lists of names and who voted for who.
>
>
>
> Right - those have already been addressed: Sending ‘revise your vote’
> requests to those who didn’t follow the process well, removing invalid
> votes.
>
indeed and all voters have fixed their issue

>
> Can I suggest rather than discussing this any further here, and before
> carrying out any PSC vote on new procedures, we carry out a post election
> survey inviting comments and proposals on how to improve the process. There
> are obviously a range of different opinions and sentiments at play here and
> I don’t think we can constructively address these in the middle of the
> ongoing voting process. Our current system is the result of iterative
> improvements to the election process that various people proposed over the
> years and while it may not be the epitome of voting systems, I think it is
> fair and honestly reflects the desires of the community.
>
what we for sure could make is to show the detailed votes without the voter
name and email. but as you say, we've a meeting Tuesday so let's discuss
then.

Later we can also ask the members to cast a vote on this for future agm.

>
> If anyone has doubts about how their vote has been cast or what they voted
> on, they can ask Marco to generate them a link that will let them review
> their vote.
>
we could also go a step further and individually send each of the voters an
automated link to their votes so they can see what they casted.

as a summary of the issues we are talking about, we had
- 3 voters that double voted for Andreas
- 2 persons from a user group that voted and were not voting members (they
had received the voting link for reviewing what was to be voted within the
user group)

cheers Marco

>
>
> Regards
>
> Tim
>
>
>
>
> - Nathan
>
> —
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Tim Sutton*
>
> *Co-founder:* Kartoza
> *Ex Project chair:* QGIS.org
>
> Visit http://kartoza.com to find out about open source:
>
> Desktop GIS programming services
> Geospatial web development
> GIS Training
> Consulting Services
>
> *Skype*: timlinux
> *IRC:* timlinux on #qgis at freenode.net
>
> I'd love to connect. Here's my calendar link
> <https://calendly.com/timlinux/30min> to make finding time easy.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20200503/1ee709a3/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: KartozaNewLogoThumbnail.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 6122 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20200503/1ee709a3/attachment.jpg>