Re: [opennic-discuss] [MISCOUNT][RESULTS] Require English in proposals and votes

Good afternoon,

On Wed, 2018-08-22 at 23:51 +0200, Megan Parat wrote:
> I recounted the votes using the mailing list's web interface:

Thank you very much!


> Yes:
> 
> Daniel Quintiliani
> Jonah Aragon
> Allen Schultz
> Dennis Emory Hannon
> Vladimir F.
> Jacob Bachmeyer
> 
> No:
> 
> Amunak
> Megan Parat
> Jack Ternan
> Sebastian Makowiecki [1]
> Ole Juul
> kevin
> Al Beano [2]
> 
> Invalid:
> 
> Philipp Schafft
> 
> Notes:
> [1] Amended vote. They specified that they wanted their vote to matter:
> >[...] as long as invalid votes are being accounted for and have a meaning (as in potential effect [...])
> And subsequently voted "no". In any case, they seem to be against the proposal as evidenced by their first vote of "Issues".
> 
> [2] Amended vote
> 
> Totals:
> 6 Yes, 7 No, 1 Invalid
> The proposal doesn't pass.
> 
> On a side note,
> 
> >Relative counts:
> >Yes: 6/14 = ~42.86%; No: 5/14 = ~35.71%; Spoilt: 3/14 = ~21.43%
> >
> >Therefore:
> >Yes wins with highest number of votes.
> 
> What's the point of calculating the *percentage* of spoilt votes if
> we're not using absolute majority ? The number of spoilt votes is fine
> for having a general idea of the legitimacy of the vote, especially
> when there's only a handful of voters.

What is the point of not doing so? I did it for all votes as it makes
things complete. After all this part is only informal at best, as it is
not used for anything else. The result is computed from the totals. I
just added the relative counts section to make it a little bit nicer to
read.

Hope that answer helps you!

With best regards,


> On 8/22/18 3:11 PM, Philipp Schafft wrote:
> > Good afternoon,
> >
> > On Tue, 2018-08-21 at 20:53 -0400, Daniel Quintiliani wrote:
> >> Yes (6):
> >>
> >> Daniel Quintiliani
> >> Jonah Aragon
> >> Allen Schultz
> >> Dennis Emory Hannon
> >> Jacob Bachmeyer
> >> Vladimir F.
> >>
> >> No (7):
> >>
> >> Amunak
> >> Megan Parat
> >> Jack Ternan
> >> Sebastian Makowiecki*
> >> vv
> >> kevin
> >> Al Beano*
> >>
> >> Invalid votes:
> >>
> >> Philipp Schafft ("democracy")
> >>
> >> * changed from invalid vote
> >>
> >> Proposal failed to pass, 6-7
> > I can not second this counting as I come to a different counting.
> >
> > I count as following:
> >
> > Yes:
> >       * Vladimir F. <[email protected]> in
> >         <[email protected]>
> >       * Allen Schultz <[email protected]> in <CAP+RUJfu
> >         [email protected]>
> >       * Dennis Emory Hannon <[email protected]> in
> >         <[email protected]>
> >       * Jacob Bachmeyer <[email protected]> in
> >         <[email protected]>
> >       * Jonah Aragon <[email protected]> in
> >         <[email protected]>
> >       * Daniel Quintiliani <[email protected]> in
> >         <[email protected]>
> >
> > No:
> >       * Amunak <[email protected]> in
> >         <[email protected]>
> >       * Megan Parat <[email protected]> in
> >         <[email protected]>
> >       * Jack Ternan <[email protected]> in
> >         <trinity-42ea374d-b4f4-49c3-b0ee-10010f652460-1534647456998@3c-app-mailcom-lxa13>
> >       * [email protected] in <20180819005723.09dd06b1@SCO>
> >       * kevin <[email protected]> in
> >         <[email protected]>
> >
> > Spoilt:
> >       * Philipp Schafft <[email protected]> in
> >         <[email protected]>
> >       * Al Beano <[email protected]> in
> >         <[email protected]>
> >       * Al Beano <[email protected]> in
> >         <[email protected]> (invalid as
> >         double voted)
> >       * Sebastian Makowiecki <[email protected]> in
> >         <[email protected]>
> >       * Sebastian Makowiecki <[email protected]> in
> >         <[email protected]> (invalid as
> >         double voted)
> >
> > Total counts:
> > Yes: 6; No: 5; Spoilt: 3; TOTAL: 14
> >
> > Relative counts:
> > Yes: 6/14 = ~42.86%; No: 5/14 = ~35.71%; Spoilt: 3/14 = ~21.43%
> >
> > Therefore:
> > Yes wins with highest number of votes.
> >
> >
> > I ask someone to step up and do a 3rd counting.
> >
> >
> > With best regards,
> >
> >
> >> On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 20:41:29 -0400 (EDT), "Daniel Quintiliani" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Voting starts: 8/15/2018 0040 UTC
> >>> Voting ends 8/22/2018 0040 UTC
> >>>
> >>> 1. All OpenNIC proposals put up for vote shall be in the English language.
> >>> 2. All votes for OpenNIC proposals shall be in the English language, and votes which are not in English shall be considered invalid.
> >>>
> >>> These rules are only applicable to proposals put up for vote, and to the votes themselves. These rules are not applicable to discussions on the mailing list or on IRC.
> >>>
> >>> The proposal shall take effect immediately after passing.
> >>>
> >>> This vote shall be done in "Aye/Yes" and "Nay/No" style. Only English language votes shall be accepted.


-- 
Philipp.
 (Rah of PH2)



--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected]