[Qgis-psc] AGM - processing the voting results

Mon May 4 06:57:56 PDT 2020

Hi,

Thanks for the clarifications. Yes, we need to stick to the charter for 
our voting procedure. If we think the procedure needs to be improved, we 
first have to fix the charter accordingly.

Glad, things are clear now.

Andreas

Am 04.05.20 um 15:48 schrieb Tim Sutton:
> Hi All
>
>
> In the 2017 AGM we added the weighted clause to section 8.1 of our 
> statutes and it was subsequently approved in the AGM. See the Loomio vote:
>
> https://www.loomio.org/d/aI6mYo1n/updates-to-the-statutes-for-trade-registry
>
> If I recall correctly the weighted scoring system was added at the 
> request of community members who felt that weighted scoring was fairer.
>
> We have double checked the AGM 2018 election results using the 
> weighted scoring system and the outcome as acted upon was correct 
> (there is no difference in the result regardless of whether you use a 
> weighted or non-weighted scoring system).
>
> In 2019 there was no election.
>
> For 2020 I suggest we stick to the charter for this election so that 
> everything is clear.
>
> For the next AGM I propose that we take on comments about how to 
> improve the election process so that it is clear and transparent while 
> addressing as many of the various concerns raised as possible.
>
> Before we publish the results for 2020 (calculated according to our 
> current statutes) can I suggest we ask two trusted community members 
> to review the calculations to ensure that everything looks fine.
>
> One additional recommendation (which will make the AGM process a 
> little more tedious), is to split the PSC and the board vote so that 
> we first simply elect the PSC, and then in a follow up election, the 
> PSC elects the board.
>
> Regards
>
> Tim
>
>
>
>> On 4 May 2020, at 13:44, Andreas Neumann <a.neumann at carto.net 
>> <mailto:a.neumann at carto.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi again,
>>
>> Ok - now I see where you got the formula from (section 8.1 in the 
>> charter).
>>
>> But I think that formula is totally broken, esp. if you count the 
>> chair, vice-chair and treasurer as being part of the PSC. 
>> Technically, yes, they are part of PSC, but I think the text in 8.1 
>> in the charter only deals with PSC-only candidates, and thus 
>> excluding the board (at least this is my interpretation ;-) ). But 
>> then the question arises, how votes in the board section should 
>> really be weighted. Why did we come up with this stupid ranking idea?
>>
>> The other problem: in the voting form we didn't clearly communicate 
>> that the PSC-only positions are actually ranked.
>>
>> Hm - things get a bit complicated ...
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>>
>>> Again, I agree with you, I just did what the charter says:
>>>
>>> "QGIS Voting Members shall be allowed a number of votes equal to the
>>> number of PSC memberships up for election and shall be asked to rank
>>> their votes in order of preference. The votes shall be weighted based on
>>> the number of PSC positions being voted for." [2]
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Marco
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/governance/charter.html#election-of-board-members
>>> [2]
>>> https://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/governance/charter.html#election-of-psc-members
>>>
>>>> Andreas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 04.05.20 um 12:34 schrieb Marco Bernasocchi:
>>>>> Hi Andreas,
>>>>>
>>>>> I already had done all the works you mentions in the second and third
>>>>> page of the result sheet in the AGM2020 folder
>>>>>
>>>>> Since all is calculated automatically from the votes I could 
>>>>> prepare it
>>>>> before the deadline.
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be great/mandatory to have more eyes going over it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>> Marco
>>>>>
>>>>> On 04.05.20 11:46, Andreas Neumann wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wonder who will be in charge with doing the processing of the 
>>>>>> voting
>>>>>> results:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - make sure that only voting members voted
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - apply our logic/formula for getting the results for PSC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps we need a "neutral"  person here - maybe Tim - would you be
>>>>>> available?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks and greetings,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andreas
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Qgis-psc mailing list
>>>>>> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-psc mailing list
>> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org>
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>
> —
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Tim Sutton*
>
> *Co-founder:*Kartoza
> *Ex Project chair:*QGIS.org <http://QGIS.org>
>
> Visit http://kartoza.com <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 <http://freenode.net>
>
> I'd love to connect. Here's my calendar link 
> <https://calendly.com/timlinux/30min> to make finding time easy.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20200504/305c92b4/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/20200504/305c92b4/attachment.jpg>