db-derby-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Susan Cline <home4...@pacbell.net>
Subject Re: [VOTE] on ground rules for determining Derby logo
Date Mon, 07 Mar 2005 23:31:28 GMT
I think you're right, we do need to better define this.  I think Option 2 would be good.
So I'll change my original proposal to this:
The voting will consist of two phases.  The first phase will be used to select the top three
finalists (unless there is a tie for number of votes there might be more than three entries
in the run-off.)
The second phase will be a run-off between the top entries selected in the first phase.

* Everyone gets to vote.
* Only one vote per person submitted to derby-user@db.apache.org
    - please don't use a different email address to vote twice :-)
* Vote for only one logo, or you may vote for 'none of the above'.
* Once we call for the vote, voting will continue for one week.  
* When we call for the vote we will announce the official deadline
   to jive with the one week period.
* The vote will be done by email to the derby-user mailing list.
*The top three vote getters (actual number of votes) from the first round of votes will
     be the only logos included in the second round of voting. 
     However, if multiple entries tie for the top number of votes, all of these entries
     will be included in the run-off.  For instance, say 7 entries all get 20 votes, then
     all 7 will be included in the run-off.  Or, if the top entry gets 20 votes and the
    second most voted on logos each get 19 votes and there are 4 of these logos,
    all 5 would be included in the second round of voting. A third example would be
    the top vote getter got 20 votes, the second got 19 votes and the third got 18 votes,
    with three entries getting 18 votes.  Then these 5 entries would all be included in the
    final round.
* For the second round of votes the highest vote getter from the three will be the winner
    of the contest overall.
* In the event the winner of the second round of voting produces the result of
    'None of the above', we will not choose a logo at this time and wait for
    more entries.
* The second round of voting will last from March 21st - March 23rd, 5 PM PST.
* I volunteer to tally the votes.
Before we actually vote for the logo, please vote on the
acceptance of these ground rules.
The vote for these ground rules will end March 9th at 5 PM PST.
[ ] +1 : I agree with these rules
[ ]  0 : abstain
[ ] -1 : I disagree with these rules
Finally, if you have already voted on the early rules today you do not need to revote unless
you wish to change your earlier vote.

Jeffrey Lichtman <swazoo@rcn.com> wrote:

>The simple majority of votes will determine the winner.

Do you mean a simple majority or a plurality? With the number of entries, 
it's not likely that there will be a simple majority (i.e. an entry whose 
votes account for more than 50% of those cast). There are several ways to 
deal with this:

1) the winner is the one with a plurality of votes (i.e. the most 
votes, although not necessarily a majority)

2) a run-off among the top vote-getters (possibly the top three)

3) instant run-off, where each voter lists up to three (or possibly 
more) selections in order of precedence. Everyone's first choice is 
counted. If the top vote-getter has more than 50% of the vote, that's the 
winner. Otherwise, figure out which candidate has the least votes, 
eliminate that one from the competition, and count the votes again using 
the next choice for anyone who preferred the candidate that was eliminated. 
Keep doing this until there is a clear winner.

4) approval voting, where each voter is allowed to vote for as many 
candidates as he or she wants. The idea is to vote for all the candidates 
one approves of. The winner is the one that gets the most votes - there are 
no run-off elections in this voting system.

I really think it's important to figure this out - otherwise, we could run 
into disagreements about which logo really won, or we could get a winner 
with three votes that the great majority of the voters didn't vote for.

- Jeff Lichtman
Check out Swazoo Koolak's Web Jukebox at

View raw message