Debian Project Leader Elections 2006
|Nomination period:||February 5th 00:00:01 UTC, 2006||February 26th 00:00:00 UTC, 2006|
|Campaigning period:||February 26th 00:00:01 UTC, 2006||March 19th 00:00:00 UTC, 2006|
|Voting period:||March 19th, 00:00:01 UTC, 2006||April 9th, 00:00:00 UTC, 2006|
Please note that the new term for the project leader shall start on April 17th, 2006.
- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [firstname.lastname@example.org] [platform]
- Ari Pollak [email@example.com] [platform]
- Steve McIntyre [firstname.lastname@example.org] [platform]
- Anthony Towns [email@example.com] [platform]
- Andreas Schuldei [firstname.lastname@example.org] [platform]
- Jonathan (Ted) Walther [email@example.com] [platform]
- Bill Allombert [firstname.lastname@example.org] [platform]
The ballot, can be received through email by emailing email@example.com with the subject leader2006.
Don Armstrong, David Nusinow, Thaddeus H. Black, Martin-Éric Racine, and MJ Ray have agreed to be debate moderators. I would like to extend the thanks of the project for their stellar work in conducting an excellently orchestrated debate, and a professionally rendered debate log. A transcript of the debate is available for review.
Data and Statistics
This year, like always, some statistics have been gathered about ballots received and acknowledgements sent periodically during the voting period. Additionally, the list of voters has been recorded. Also, the tally sheet is also available to be viewed. Please remember that the project leader election has a secret ballot, so the tally sheet is produced with the hash of the alias of the voter rather than the name; the alias having been sent to the corresponding voter when the acknowledgement of the ballot was sent so that people may verify that their votes are correct. While the voting was still open the tally was a dummy one; after the vote, the final tally sheet has been put in place. Please note that for secret ballots the md5sum on the dummy tally sheet is randomly generated, as otherwise the dummy tally sheet would leak information relating the md5 hash and the voter.
With 972 developers, we have:
Current Developer Count = 972 Q ( sqrt(#devel) / 2 ) = 15.5884572681199 K min(5, Q ) = 5 Quorum (3 x Q ) = 46.7653718043597
- Option1 Reached quorum: 319 > 47.0531614240744
- Option2 Reached quorum: 158 > 47.0531614240744
- Option3 Reached quorum: 344 > 47.0531614240744
- Option4 Reached quorum: 339 > 47.0531614240744
- Option5 Reached quorum: 321 > 47.0531614240744
- Option6 Reached quorum: 73 > 47.0531614240744
- Option7 Reached quorum: 294 > 47.0531614240744
All candidates would need a simple majority to be eligible.
- Option1 passes Majority. 4.253 (319/75) > 1
- Dropping Option2 because of Majority. 0.782 (158/202) <= 1
- Option3 passes Majority. 6.491 (344/53) > 1
- Option4 passes Majority. 4.775 (339/71) > 1
- Option5 passes Majority. 4.280 (321/75) > 1
- Dropping Option6 because of Majority. 0.243 (73/301) <= 1
- Option7 passes Majority. 3.379 (294/87) > 1
The winner of the election is Anthony Towns
I would like to thank all the candidates for their service to the project, for standing for the post of project leader, and for offering the developers a strong and viable group of candidates.
Total unique votes cast: 421, which is 43.3127572% of all possible votes.
In the graph above, any pink colored nodes imply that the option did not pass majority, the Blue is the winner. The Octagon is used for the options that did not beat the default. In the following table, tally[row x][col y] represents the votes that option x received over option y. A more detailed explanation of the beat matrix may help in understanding the table. For understanding the Condorcet method, the Wikipedia entry is fairly informative.
- Option 1 "Jeroen van Wolffelaar"
- Option 2 "Ari Pollak"
- Option 3 "Steve McIntyre"
- Option 4 "Anthony Towns"
- Option 5 "Andreas Schuldei"
- Option 6 "Jonathan aka Ted Walther"
- Option 7 "Bill Allombert"
- Option 8 "None of the Above"
Looking at row 2, column 1, Ari Pollak
received 40 votes over Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Looking at row 1, column 2, Jeroen van Wolffelaar
received 310 votes over Ari Pollak.
- Option 3 defeats Option 1 by ( 230 - 123) = 107 votes.
- Option 4 defeats Option 1 by ( 230 - 144) = 86 votes.
- Option 1 defeats Option 7 by ( 228 - 119) = 109 votes.
- Option 1 defeats Option 8 by ( 319 - 75) = 244 votes.
- Option 4 defeats Option 3 by ( 190 - 184) = 6 votes.
- Option 3 defeats Option 5 by ( 233 - 124) = 109 votes.
- Option 3 defeats Option 7 by ( 278 - 68) = 210 votes.
- Option 3 defeats Option 8 by ( 344 - 53) = 291 votes.
- Option 4 defeats Option 5 by ( 242 - 135) = 107 votes.
- Option 4 defeats Option 7 by ( 281 - 99) = 182 votes.
- Option 4 defeats Option 8 by ( 339 - 71) = 268 votes.
- Option 5 defeats Option 7 by ( 240 - 117) = 123 votes.
- Option 5 defeats Option 8 by ( 321 - 75) = 246 votes.
- Option 7 defeats Option 8 by ( 294 - 87) = 207 votes.
The Schwartz Set contains
- Option 4 "Anthony Towns"
- Option 4 "Anthony Towns"
Debian uses the Condorcet method for votes.
Simplistically, plain Condorcet's method
can be stated like so :
Consider all possible two-way races between candidates.
The Condorcet winner, if there is one, is the one
candidate who can beat each other candidate in a two-way
race with that candidate.
The problem is that in complex elections, there may well
be a circular relations ship in which A beats B, B beats C,
and C beats A. Most of the variations on Condorcet use
various means of resolving the tie. See
Cloneproof Schwartz Sequential Dropping
for details. Debian's variation is spelled out in the
specifically, § A.6.