william(at)elan.net [william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net] wrote:
Add creation of official SPF test suite to long-term list (the
prerequisite for this is obviously a finalization of SPF Classic
protocol document).
<council-member>
I will add it.
</council-member>
For voting, I think either Approval or Condorcet will work fine [...]
What I'm however concerned is possibility of large organization
(commercial or otherwise) asking its members/employers to join SPF in
order to advance certain candidate(s) - with large enough base of
additional people not even Condorcet will stop them from gaining the
majority.
Well, whenever groups of people are engaged in democratic elections,
there's always the risk of being "taken over". I think a good solution to
that would be to require voters to register themselves a month or two in
advance of the election.
As such [...] I recommend that for this purpose you establish a new
body (i.e. "election commission") which goal is to supervise elections
and approve list of candidates - my recommendation is that it be small
(say 3 people) and that it be randomly composed of people who NOBODY
else at SPF Community has problems with.
The electoral committee appears to me as a good idea, and I'd have
suggested 3 people for it as well. I also can roughly agree with the
procedure you suggested for their selection, with some exceptions:
1. If you remove candidates simply because someone raises an objection,
you open yourself to "DoS" attacks from outside.
2. The electoral committee shouldn't be able to veto candidates for the
council on arbitrary grounds. I think the committee should be
restricted to formal decisions.
Julian Mehnle.