RationalWiki:2018 board of trustees election/Results

TLDR

The new 2018-19 RMF board members are @Bob M, David Gerard, and LeftyGreenMario.

Votes counted by Kazitor and Dysklyver. Pester us down there if you have complaints or questions.

Results

Stripped user IDs (interpreted as weights), added names, specified 3 seats and saved as Board2018alf.blt. To understand this raw data, the first line represents number of candidates and number of positions available (7 candidates, 3 spots). The zero at the bottom means end of the list. All other lines, drop the 1 (weight marker) at the beginning and 0 at the end (end marker) and each line is a ballot with preference of candidates in order left to right. The first ballot is 2,4,1,5,6,3,7.

Command: py -2 runElection.py MeekSTV Board2018alf.blt > Board2018.txt

important update

Just realised I might've goofed big-time sorry. Hurredly turned on my computer again to confirm.

It's possible the names are meant to be in alphabetical order (in my defence, there's zero information on how this is meant to be). That yields the more agreeable

Bob M, David Gerard, and LeftyGreenMario

@David Gerard and FuzzyCatPotato, please confirm. Sorry if caused any needless problems :( —Kazitor 13:00, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

This also means the common votes for 5 are for LGM. The more I think about it the more I suspect this is the case. Unfortunately I have to go to sleep so nothing more from me until tomorrow. —Kazitor 13:02, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

yeah, the names were in alphabetical order - you can see what the server config was during the election here - David Gerard (talk) 22:45, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Status

Actually the worst possible time to receive the ballot file; I have to leave right now. Will have results in a few hours. —Kazitor 08:02, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

All done. —Kazitor 09:11, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I will read the ballot file when I get it sometime soon. Results expected within the day (gmt). — Dysk (contribs) 08:30, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I am currently verifying the count it, bear with me while I confirm Kazitor's results. — Dysk (contribs) 16:54, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

On preliminary basis; Winners are Bob M, David Gerard, and LeftyGreenMario. I have not yet done the obligatory checks to verify this. — Dysk (contribs) 17:09, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Three candidates are elected, they are:

• Bob M
• David Gerard
• LeftyGreenMario

Based on verified results from 37 eligible voters. — Dysk (contribs) 18:09, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

People who don't like it sign below

I come in and see the worst possible options (Rob Smith and Pbfreespace3) reaching the threshold on the first damn ballot whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy. They're the same person! They should be evicted! Serocco 11:36, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Removal is possible, although it would obviously be controversial. Article IV, Section 8: "Any Trustee may be removed by a majority vote of the full membership of the Board." CowHouse (talk) 12:51, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Go sober up Serocco, Rob and PB3 are different people, they're just both assholes. Now I regret declining since I have better qualifications than Rob. Let that sink in, a guy who admits he isn't Board material has better qualifications than someone who actually won the election. To everyone who voted for RobSmith: Fuck you, you proudly ignorant self righteous motherfucking tit-humping cunt sucking dummkopfs. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 12:54, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Ummm...Rob lost. RoninMacbeth (talk) 14:04, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

So did PB3. I don't know what this guy is going on about, it pretty explicity says that Bob M, David Gerard, and LeftyGreenMario won. 𝔊𝔬𝔞𝔱-𝔈𝔪𝔭𝔢𝔯𝔬𝔯 𝔅𝔦𝔤𝔰 (𝔴𝔬𝔯𝔡𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔦𝔰𝔡𝔬𝔪/𝔞𝔠𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔳𝔢𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔰) 14:05, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

To @RoninMacbeth and Bigs and everyone else that is confused, look at the fossil record. Kazitor originally said the winners were LeftyGreenMario, RobSmith and Pbfreespace3. CowHouse (talk) 14:08, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Oh, makes sense. I can see why so many people got pissed about it. 𝔊𝔬𝔞𝔱-𝔈𝔪𝔭𝔢𝔯𝔬𝔯 𝔅𝔦𝔤𝔰 (𝔴𝔬𝔯𝔡𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔦𝔰𝔡𝔬𝔪/𝔞𝔠𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔳𝔢𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔰) 14:10, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

[EC] Ah, I see. RoninMacbeth (talk) 14:11, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I apologize for my outburst, though I still believe that my anger was justified. RobSmith is not only unqualified for the RW Board of trustees, but has actively expressed hatred and disdain for this site and all it stands for. Electing him here would be the same as CP electing me to manage their funds, not that CP actually elects anyone but still, the point stands. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 14:20, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Bullshit.RobSmith^{The future is now} 02:20, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

You hold elections at CP now? And I can run in them? You're too kind Rob but I must decline. Conflicts of interest and all that. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 02:27, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

I don't think CP has ever had an election (I tried to organize one once and got an infinite ban). But where have I ever expressed hatred for RW? Put up or shut up. RobSmith^{i demand a recount} 02:37, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Eh, if I had been here when those results were up I probably would've exploded too. 𝔊𝔬𝔞𝔱-𝔈𝔪𝔭𝔢𝔯𝔬𝔯 𝔅𝔦𝔤𝔰 (𝔴𝔬𝔯𝔡𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔦𝔰𝔡𝔬𝔪/𝔞𝔠𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔳𝔢𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔰) 14:23, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Oof I don't think I would be comfortable working with someone who thinks Californians are rude idiots who want Charles Manson to be elected. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 17:29, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, it would be like claiming people from his state are redneck Christian terrorists who would want Timothy McVeigh for governor: not only inflammatorially untrue, but just plain uncalled for. Peyre (talk) 22:31, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

The BoN's talk page comment is right. While I admit the LGM+BobM+DavidG results seem more likely, I'd like to see official confirmation from a returning officer. --RWRW (talk) 14:23, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

@RWRW I'm pretty sure Kazitor is the returning officer, and he posted the results above. 𝔊𝔬𝔞𝔱-𝔈𝔪𝔭𝔢𝔯𝔬𝔯 𝔅𝔦𝔤𝔰 (𝔴𝔬𝔯𝔡𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔦𝔰𝔡𝔬𝔪/𝔞𝔠𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔳𝔢𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔰) 14:31, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

@Kazitor Yes, the alphabetical one is correct. Thank you for checking. The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 17:51, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

@FuzzyCatPotato Thanks for confirming. Apologies to everyone else for confusion caused in the meantime; now we all know for next time :) —Kazitor 21:33, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

When a clerical error almost puts one of our resident crazies in charge of the site's finances. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 00:33, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Oh thank god. All three of my (remaining) endorsed candidates won and the crazies got kicked.Serocco 01:31, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

As somebody who'd have to work with whoever's elected, can you imagine how relieved I feel? Halle-bloody-lujah! Spud (talk) 01:46, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank the voters! I was worried, but you guys did the right thing, most of you anyway. :) --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 03:07, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

I hope that's not a dig directed towards me... —Kazitor 03:32, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

If you didn't vote RobSmith then you're fine. If you did, yes it is. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 03:33, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

All good, just a little paranoid over the miscount is all :) —Kazitor 03:35, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Oh no I'm not going hard on you, especially not for just having silly little honest mistakes that quickly resolved themselves. Take chances, make mistakes, get messy, that's what the crazy ladies say. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 03:39, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

While checking the vote/voters I found that it is possible to count the votes manually with excel, so there's always that. :) — Dysk (contribs) 09:40, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

The Russbots win again. RobSmith^{The future is now} 02:24, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

That's quite the level of paranoia, to think the Russians would involve themselves in something as petty as a RW board election. Peyre (talk) 16:17, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

As a verification method I checked each set of votes against the corresponding voter, everyone who participated is a perfectly well established editor. If there was a Russian bot problem, it would have to correspond with the entire wiki being under Russian control. Which it obviously isn't. — Dysk (contribs) 16:33, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Unless the dude is joking, he's just unwilling to consider that voters just don't like him. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 17:16, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

What if @Dysklyver and @Kazitor are actually undercover Russian operatives? The plot thickens... --RWRW (talk) 17:27, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Da. Operator from Soviet Republic of Cornwall, much obliged to be working on important election with comrade RWRW :D — Dysk (contribs) 19:33, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

I am Agent Boris of American Central Intelligence Agency. RationalWiki is NOT under the control of Mother Russia. Okay? Da Svedanya. No more questions. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 19:31, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

I am as much an undercover Russian operative as there is a cabal. And there is no cabal. —Kazitor 23:12, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Undercover operator? I hope that's not a euphemism. Peyre (talk) 01:00, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

For the record, I checked my undercover and I found no foreign operators there. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 01:13, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

@LeftyGreenMario What about domestic operators? ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 01:38, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

C'est les anglais qui ont debarqué. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 01:40, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Vote counting under different systems

For curiosity sake I wanted to know how the vote would have resulted if a variant ranked-preference vote counting system were used. I crunched the numbers of the raw output under two other transferable vote systems (rip-off-tab and rip-off-tab adjusted. The results were the same as the stv:

Rip-off-tab (eliminated or elected candidates are removed from the count and the next choice on each ballot is counted instead. If all preferences have been eliminated or elected the ballot is tossed (though the threshold is not changed, it remains at >12 ). This means all votes are counted and calculated in integers only (no floats). In this case they were elected in the following order:

• 1st elected Mario
• 1st elim Enchanted
• 2nd elim Ikanreed
• 2nd elected David Gerard
• 3rd elected Bob M

19 surplus votes remained (18 ballots for eliminated or elected candidates did not include Pbfreespace nor Robsmith in their list of preference. Votes were distributed as following:

• Pbfreespace 11
• Robsmith 8

The second system (with eliminated candidates vote changing to next in preference. When a candidate wins the number of their votes minus the threshold divided by the number of next preferred candidate. The results were:

• 1st Elim Enchanted
• 2nd Elim Ikanreed
• 1st Elected Mario
• 3rd Elim Pbfreespace
• 2nd Elected David Gerard
• 4th Elim Robsmith
• Remaining Bob M (elected by default)

(the last remaining candidate did not cross threshold but had nearly 50% more than Robsmith)

Two candidates remaining are elected

There are two notable differences in these two methods. First is the order of being elected or eliminated. Also, Pbfreespace comes 4th in the rip-off-tab while Robsmith is 4th in adjusted. In both cases 4th player candidates were slightly closer to Bob M than in stv but in both Bob M was well ahead of Pbfreespace or Robsmith.

If you really want to see the number crunching let me know. I'll send you the xlsx though I'll have to add some notes and you'll have to make some effort and try to figure it out. ShabiDOO 23:56, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

STV seems to be pretty horrible when electing a significant proportion of the candidates (almost half this time) with relatively few ballots. —Kazitor 23:13, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

It's horrible, but there's no better alternative for single-district multi-member individual-candidate elections (eg, choosing boardmembers) that I'm aware of. Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 05:29, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

I have to reluctantly agree here. Least evil. I see no problem with the variant proportional voting for constituency-at-large than the one we're using now (not to mention it's relatively simple to set up with free software/apps. I don't think the other variations are obviously better. ShabiDOO