logo contest

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
23 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

logo contest

Ryan McKinley
We have discussed with the apache PRC (public relations committee),  
and they agree that the top choice in the logo contest should be  
disqualified for its similarity to the solaris logo.

Given the rules agreed upon in http://wiki.apache.org/solr/ 
LogoContest, the next step is for Solr committers to use the results  
of the community poll to decide what the official logo should be.

I posted the results here:
  http://people.apache.org/~ryan/solr-logo-results.html
If we count a vote that came in 12 hours late, the results are quite  
different:
  http://people.apache.org/~ryan/solr-logo-results-late.html

Using the direct scoring method agreed upon, the logo with the most  
points is:
  https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png

However, it is tough to gauge the real intent/preference since the  
vote totals are so low.

I see two options:

1.  Have solr committers vote to accept:
  https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png

2. Have a 'runoff' poll with the top contenders:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394264/apache_solr_a_red.jpg
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394266/apache_solr_b_red.jpg
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394268/apache_solr_c_red.jpg


Following the rules strictly points to option #1, but I think option  
#2 may better reflect the original intent of the community poll.

Personally, I am happy with any of these options (and logos); I just  
want to make sure we have a process that everyone feels is/was fair.

ryan





Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

Andrzej Białecki-2
Ryan McKinley wrote:

> I see two options:
>
> 1.  Have solr committers vote to accept:
>  https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png 
>
>
> 2. Have a 'runoff' poll with the top contenders:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png 
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394264/apache_solr_a_red.jpg 
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394266/apache_solr_b_red.jpg 
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394268/apache_solr_c_red.jpg 
>
>
>
> Following the rules strictly points to option #1, but I think option #2
> may better reflect the original intent of the community poll.

I prefer option #2 as well.



--
Best regards,
Andrzej Bialecki     <><
  ___. ___ ___ ___ _ _   __________________________________
[__ || __|__/|__||\/|  Information Retrieval, Semantic Web
___|||__||  \|  ||  |  Embedded Unix, System Integration
http://www.sigram.com  Contact: info at sigram dot com

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

Ryan McKinley
In reply to this post by Ryan McKinley
> I see two options:
> 1.  Have solr committers vote to accept:
>  https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
> 2. Have a 'runoff' poll with the top contenders:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394264/apache_solr_a_red.jpg
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394266/apache_solr_b_red.jpg
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394268/apache_solr_c_red.jpg
>
> Following the rules strictly points to option #1, but I think option #2 may
> better reflect the original intent of the community poll.
> Personally, I am happy with any of these options (and logos); I just want to
> make sure we have a process that everyone feels is/was fair.


I'll add that i have a slight preference for option #1 since it would
get this process done with sooner :)

ryan
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

Mark Miller-3
In reply to this post by Ryan McKinley
Hoss may lay down the rules on us, but if he doesn't (or if hes in a
good mood today), +1 on the runoff vote.

Ryan McKinley wrote:

> We have discussed with the apache PRC (public relations committee),
> and they agree that the top choice in the logo contest should be
> disqualified for its similarity to the solaris logo.
>
> Given the rules agreed upon in
> http://wiki.apache.org/solr/LogoContest, the next step is for Solr
> committers to use the results of the community poll to decide what the
> official logo should be.
>
> I posted the results here:
>  http://people.apache.org/~ryan/solr-logo-results.html
> If we count a vote that came in 12 hours late, the results are quite
> different:
>  http://people.apache.org/~ryan/solr-logo-results-late.html
>
> Using the direct scoring method agreed upon, the logo with the most
> points is:
>  https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png 
>
>
> However, it is tough to gauge the real intent/preference since the
> vote totals are so low.
>
> I see two options:
>
> 1.  Have solr committers vote to accept:
>  https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png 
>
>
> 2. Have a 'runoff' poll with the top contenders:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png 
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394264/apache_solr_a_red.jpg 
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394266/apache_solr_b_red.jpg 
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394268/apache_solr_c_red.jpg 
>
>
>
> Following the rules strictly points to option #1, but I think option
> #2 may better reflect the original intent of the community poll.
>
> Personally, I am happy with any of these options (and logos); I just
> want to make sure we have a process that everyone feels is/was fair.
>
> ryan
>
>
>
>
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

Noble Paul നോബിള്‍  नोब्ळ्
I prefertaking option #1 and not delaying this any further

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Mark Miller <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hoss may lay down the rules on us, but if he doesn't (or if hes in a good
> mood today), +1 on the runoff vote.
>
> Ryan McKinley wrote:
>>
>> We have discussed with the apache PRC (public relations committee), and
>> they agree that the top choice in the logo contest should be disqualified
>> for its similarity to the solaris logo.
>>
>> Given the rules agreed upon in http://wiki.apache.org/solr/LogoContest,
>> the next step is for Solr committers to use the results of the community
>> poll to decide what the official logo should be.
>>
>> I posted the results here:
>>  http://people.apache.org/~ryan/solr-logo-results.html
>> If we count a vote that came in 12 hours late, the results are quite
>> different:
>>  http://people.apache.org/~ryan/solr-logo-results-late.html
>>
>> Using the direct scoring method agreed upon, the logo with the most points
>> is:
>>
>>  https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
>>
>> However, it is tough to gauge the real intent/preference since the vote
>> totals are so low.
>>
>> I see two options:
>>
>> 1.  Have solr committers vote to accept:
>>
>>  https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
>>
>> 2. Have a 'runoff' poll with the top contenders:
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394264/apache_solr_a_red.jpg
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394266/apache_solr_b_red.jpg
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394268/apache_solr_c_red.jpg
>>
>>
>> Following the rules strictly points to option #1, but I think option #2
>> may better reflect the original intent of the community poll.
>>
>> Personally, I am happy with any of these options (and logos); I just want
>> to make sure we have a process that everyone feels is/was fair.
>>
>> ryan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>



--
--Noble Paul
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

Erik Hatcher
I'm with Noble.  #1 for me as well for the sake of making a decision  
and running with a quality logo sooner rather than later.

ObBiasTransparency: Steve Stedman,the designer of sslogo* submissions,  
is a good friend of mine.  Awesome dude.  He does really nice work.

        Erik

On Dec 4, 2008, at 11:36 AM, Noble Paul നോബിള്‍  
नोब्ळ् wrote:

> I prefertaking option #1 and not delaying this any further
>
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Mark Miller <[hidden email]>  
> wrote:
>> Hoss may lay down the rules on us, but if he doesn't (or if hes in  
>> a good
>> mood today), +1 on the runoff vote.
>>
>> Ryan McKinley wrote:
>>>
>>> We have discussed with the apache PRC (public relations  
>>> committee), and
>>> they agree that the top choice in the logo contest should be  
>>> disqualified
>>> for its similarity to the solaris logo.
>>>
>>> Given the rules agreed upon in http://wiki.apache.org/solr/LogoContest 
>>> ,
>>> the next step is for Solr committers to use the results of the  
>>> community
>>> poll to decide what the official logo should be.
>>>
>>> I posted the results here:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~ryan/solr-logo-results.html
>>> If we count a vote that came in 12 hours late, the results are quite
>>> different:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~ryan/solr-logo-results-late.html
>>>
>>> Using the direct scoring method agreed upon, the logo with the  
>>> most points
>>> is:
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
>>>
>>> However, it is tough to gauge the real intent/preference since the  
>>> vote
>>> totals are so low.
>>>
>>> I see two options:
>>>
>>> 1.  Have solr committers vote to accept:
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
>>>
>>> 2. Have a 'runoff' poll with the top contenders:
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394264/apache_solr_a_red.jpg
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394266/apache_solr_b_red.jpg
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394268/apache_solr_c_red.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>> Following the rules strictly points to option #1, but I think  
>>> option #2
>>> may better reflect the original intent of the community poll.
>>>
>>> Personally, I am happy with any of these options (and logos); I  
>>> just want
>>> to make sure we have a process that everyone feels is/was fair.
>>>
>>> ryan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --Noble Paul

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

hossman
In reply to this post by Ryan McKinley

: 1.  Have solr committers vote to accept:
:  https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png

The process as outlined on the wiki was that the commiters should have a
ranked prefrence vote, after considering the point totals from the first
vote. (with the added caveat that a -1 veto needs to be allowed since it's
a vote to commit a change to the project)

Considering the community prefrences expressed, I suggest that the
committers hold a vote of the "high scoring" entries.  Picking a score
of 10 as the cut off, that would give us 10 entries to vote on....

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394266/apache_solr_b_red.jpg
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394264/apache_solr_a_red.jpg
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394268/apache_solr_c_red.jpg
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394165/solr-logo.png
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394376/solr_sp.png
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394267/apache_solr_c_blue.jpg
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394475/solr2_maho-vote.png
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394350/solr.s4.jpg
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394218/solr-solid.png

(given the distribution of scores, 10 just seems like a natural cutoff)


-Hoss

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

Yonik Seeley-2
The methodology will very likely determine the outcome here, with

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394268/apache_solr_c_red.jpg

Being the likely two candidates for winning.  My guess is that
narrowing to the two most popular options first would make #2 the
winner, while voting on the top 10 (w/o any strategy for winning)
would make #1 the winner.

fun, fun.  So people who want one of these options to win should vote
only for that option, really.

-Yonik


the two most popular would make the second option win, while expanding
it would make fir

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Chris Hostetter
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> : 1.  Have solr committers vote to accept:
> :  https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
>
> The process as outlined on the wiki was that the commiters should have a
> ranked prefrence vote, after considering the point totals from the first
> vote. (with the added caveat that a -1 veto needs to be allowed since it's
> a vote to commit a change to the project)
>
> Considering the community prefrences expressed, I suggest that the
> committers hold a vote of the "high scoring" entries.  Picking a score
> of 10 as the cut off, that would give us 10 entries to vote on....
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394266/apache_solr_b_red.jpg
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394264/apache_solr_a_red.jpg
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394268/apache_solr_c_red.jpg
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394165/solr-logo.png
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394376/solr_sp.png
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394267/apache_solr_c_blue.jpg
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394475/solr2_maho-vote.png
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394350/solr.s4.jpg
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394218/solr-solid.png
>
> (given the distribution of scores, 10 just seems like a natural cutoff)
>
>
> -Hoss
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

Ryan McKinley
In reply to this post by hossman

On Dec 4, 2008, at 1:16 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:

>
> : 1.  Have solr committers vote to accept:
> :  https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
>
> The process as outlined on the wiki was that the commiters should  
> have a
> ranked prefrence vote, after considering the point totals from the  
> first
> vote. (with the added caveat that a -1 veto needs to be allowed  
> since it's
> a vote to commit a change to the project)
>
> Considering the community prefrences expressed, I suggest that the
> committers hold a vote of the "high scoring" entries.  Picking a score
> of 10 as the cut off, that would give us 10 entries to vote on....

right, but what should be the role of committers voting in the second  
round? Is it:

1. Rank the entries the committers like best
  or
2. Rank the entries the committers think best represent the community  
preferences.

My understanding of the purpose of the second round is to interpret  
the results of the community poll and cast a binding VOTE.  I think we  
should either have committers vote on the community intent is or re-
run the poll with the full community, since deciphering the #2 choice  
is unclear.

As yonik said "fun fun fun"

ryan


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

Guillaume Smet
In reply to this post by Yonik Seeley-2
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 7:34 PM, Yonik Seeley <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The methodology will very likely determine the outcome here, with
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394268/apache_solr_c_red.jpg
>
> Being the likely two candidates for winning.  My guess is that
> narrowing to the two most popular options first would make #2 the
> winner, while voting on the top 10 (w/o any strategy for winning)
> would make #1 the winner.

+1.

All apache_solr_c_red.jpg flavoured logos have a total score of 94.
That should be taken into account IMHO and we should reduce the number
of choices for these ones.

--
Guillaume
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

hossman

: All apache_solr_c_red.jpg flavoured logos have a total score of 94.
: That should be taken into account IMHO and we should reduce the number
: of choices for these ones.

To re-iterate a comment I made in SOLR-84 that "wouldn't be fair to the
people who have been submitting ideas and then retracting them and
resubmitting variations based on feedback."

People were told many, MANY, times throughout the process that submiting
multiple "variant" entries would risk diluting the votes.  One of the
purposes of the long period for submissions was to give people time to
post ideas, get feedback, and then tweak submissions and people who did
that shouldn't be "excluded" from the final vote for following the rules.
(sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png is a prime example of this)








-Hoss

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

hossman
In reply to this post by Yonik Seeley-2

: Being the likely two candidates for winning.  My guess is that
: narrowing to the two most popular options first would make #2 the
: winner, while voting on the top 10 (w/o any strategy for winning)
: would make #1 the winner.

limiting to only voting for the top 2 seems unrepresentative since more  
then one apache_solr_c_red.jpg variant tied for 2nd.
 
: fun, fun.  So people who want one of these options to win should vote
: only for that option, really.

Perhaps instead of just ranking top 5, we should ask committers to
rank all of the choices on the final ballot to eliminate the
"strategy" factor you are refering to ... i think we can trust all
committers to understand this, but if someone botches it (or refuses?)
we'll just shift the number of points each item earns down by the
appropraite number (so if you want your 1st rank to earn 10
points, you must list all 10, if you only list 4 then your top ranked item
only earns 4 points)
 
that won't violate anything in the rules as orriginally spelled out, and
should help take into account the variant score dilution. (even though i
don't think we should be overly accomidating this seems fair)

-Hoss

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

hossman
In reply to this post by Ryan McKinley
: right, but what should be the role of committers voting in the second round?
: Is it:
:
: 1. Rank the entries the committers like best
:  or
: 2. Rank the entries the committers think best represent the community
: preferences.
:
: My understanding of the purpose of the second round is to interpret the
: results of the community poll and cast a binding VOTE.  I think we should

committers should cast their votes as they feel appropriate to best serve
the interests of the community -- it's not really different then voting on
an implementation approach for a feature, or what logging framework to
use, or a decisison to switch from java 1.5 to 1.6 ... we have to make a
subjective decision based on the feedback we've observed from the
community as a whole (with solr-logo-results.html serving as our cliff
notes)


-Hoss

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

hossman
In reply to this post by Mark Miller-3

: Hoss may lay down the rules on us, but if he doesn't (or if hes in a good mood

For the record: i'm (almost) always i na good mood -- it's just hard to
tell because i spell like an angry unibomber wanna-be and i have a moral
objection to using emoticons so my email based sarcasim is very, very,
dry.


-Hoss

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

Mike Klaas
In reply to this post by hossman
On 4-Dec-08, at 2:33 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:

>
> : Being the likely two candidates for winning.  My guess is that
> : narrowing to the two most popular options first would make #2 the
> : winner, while voting on the top 10 (w/o any strategy for winning)
> : would make #1 the winner.
>
> limiting to only voting for the top 2 seems unrepresentative since  
> more
> then one apache_solr_c_red.jpg variant tied for 2nd.
>
> : fun, fun.  So people who want one of these options to win should  
> vote
> : only for that option, really.
>
> Perhaps instead of just ranking top 5, we should ask committers to
> rank all of the choices on the final ballot to eliminate the
> "strategy" factor you are refering to ... i think we can trust all
> committers to understand this, but if someone botches it (or refuses?)
> we'll just shift the number of points each item earns down by the
> appropraite number (so if you want your 1st rank to earn 10
> points, you must list all 10, if you only list 4 then your top  
> ranked item
> only earns 4 points)

Eliminating strategic voting merely biases the outcome toward the logo  
without the vote splitting problem.  That is no solution.
It is better to allow strategic voting, as that is the only way for  
voters to express certain preferences in this system.

I would personally prefer more of an "elimination"-style vote (i.e.,  
STV).  Each voter lists the logos they prefer, in order.  The logos  
are ranked by first place votes.  The last in the rank is eliminated  
from the contest, and anyone who had that logo as their first-place  
vote has their vote transferred to the next logo on the list, if any.  
Iterate until two logos remain.  There is no danger of vote-splitting  
and the outcome maximizes global welfare in terms of binary  
preferences (well, probably not, due to Arrow's theorem, but it does a  
good job regardless).

-Mike
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

hossman

: I would personally prefer more of an "elimination"-style vote (i.e., STV).

Ah... yeah, that seems like it would be a more fair way to deal with
things then my suggestion, and it doesn't violate the spirt of the
rules as original outlined (it's still a vote of ranked preferences).  Are
you volunteering to do the vote counting Mike?

Anyone have objections to using STV?

Background Info...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting





-Hoss

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

Mike Klaas
On 7-Dec-08, at 7:40 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:

>
> : I would personally prefer more of an "elimination"-style vote  
> (i.e., STV).
>
> Ah... yeah, that seems like it would be a more fair way to deal with
> things then my suggestion, and it doesn't violate the spirt of the
> rules as original outlined (it's still a vote of ranked  
> preferences).  Are
> you volunteering to do the vote counting Mike?

Sure thing.

-Mike
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

Mike Klaas

On 8-Dec-08, at 10:47 AM, Mike Klaas wrote:

> On 7-Dec-08, at 7:40 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>
>>
>> : I would personally prefer more of an "elimination"-style vote  
>> (i.e., STV).
>>
>> Ah... yeah, that seems like it would be a more fair way to deal with
>> things then my suggestion, and it doesn't violate the spirt of the
>> rules as original outlined (it's still a vote of ranked  
>> preferences).  Are
>> you volunteering to do the vote counting Mike?
>
> Sure thing.

I take it that there are no objections?  If so, I'll call a vote by  
the end of the week.

cheers,
-Mike
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

Yonik Seeley-2
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Mike Klaas <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 8-Dec-08, at 10:47 AM, Mike Klaas wrote:
>
>> On 7-Dec-08, at 7:40 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> : I would personally prefer more of an "elimination"-style vote (i.e.,
>>> STV).
>>>
>>> Ah... yeah, that seems like it would be a more fair way to deal with
>>> things then my suggestion, and it doesn't violate the spirt of the
>>> rules as original outlined (it's still a vote of ranked preferences).
>>>  Are
>>> you volunteering to do the vote counting Mike?
>>
>> Sure thing.
>
> I take it that there are no objections?  If so, I'll call a vote by the end
> of the week.

+1
I just wish we had used this method with the community vote.

I guess as a committer I should try and figure out what order the
community would have voted and do that.

-Yonik
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: logo contest

Ryan McKinley

On Dec 10, 2008, at 3:41 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Mike Klaas <[hidden email]>  
> wrote:
>>
>> On 8-Dec-08, at 10:47 AM, Mike Klaas wrote:
>>
>>> On 7-Dec-08, at 7:40 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> : I would personally prefer more of an "elimination"-style vote  
>>>> (i.e.,
>>>> STV).
>>>>
>>>> Ah... yeah, that seems like it would be a more fair way to deal  
>>>> with
>>>> things then my suggestion, and it doesn't violate the spirt of the
>>>> rules as original outlined (it's still a vote of ranked  
>>>> preferences).
>>>> Are
>>>> you volunteering to do the vote counting Mike?
>>>
>>> Sure thing.
>>
>> I take it that there are no objections?  If so, I'll call a vote by  
>> the end
>> of the week.
>
> +1
> I just wish we had used this method with the community vote.
>
> I guess as a committer I should try and figure out what order the
> community would have voted and do that.
>

Yes -- I am only comfortable with a 'committer only' vote if it is  
clear we are all operating to figure out what the first community vote  
intended -- not to select our own preferences.  (unless it is an  
explicit veto)

ryan


12