Wikimedia Foundation elections/2021/Results/es
La finalización de la elección es el 31 agosto 2021. Posteriormente, no se aceptarán más votos.
Los resultados se anuncian el 7 septiembre 2021. Cualquier comentario que tengas sobre la elección 2021, hazlo en la página post-análisis de la elección.
|Elecciones a la junta directiva 2021|
|Información para los votantes|
|Voto único transferible|
2021 Board of Trustees Election Results
Election for 4 seats with 19 candidates. Total 6,873 votes.
- 5. Eliane Dominique Yao
- 6. Mike Peel
- 7. Pascale Camus-Walter
- 8. Iván Martínez
- 9. Adam Wight
- 10. Ravishankar Ayyakkannu
- 11. Farah Jack Mustaklem
- 12. Lionel Scheepmans
- 12. Vinicius Siqueira
- 14. Douglas Ian Scott
- 15. Ashwin Baindur
- 16. Reda Kerbouche
- 17. Gerard Meijssen
- 18. Pavan Santhosh Surampudi
- 19. Raavi Mohanty
The following table describes the calculations that happened in order to achieve the result above. In each round of calculation, the candidate(s) who achieved more votes than the quota are declared elected. Their surplus votes above the quota are redistributed to the remaining candidates. If nobody achieves the quota, the lowest ranking candidate is eliminated and their votes are redistributed to the remaining candidates. To understand this better, please refer to this link.
Eliminated: Raavi Mohanty
Eliminated: Pavan Santhosh Surampudi
Eliminated: Gerard Meijssen
Eliminated: Reda Kerbouche
Eliminated: Ashwin Baindur
Eliminated: Douglas Ian Scott
Eliminated: Lionel Scheepmans, Vinicius Siqueira
Eliminated: Farah Jack Mustaklem
Eliminated: Ravishankar Ayyakkannu
Eliminated: Adam Wight
Eliminated: Iván Martínez
Eliminated: Pascale Camus-Walter
Eliminated: Mike Peel
Elected: Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight, Victoria Doronina
Elected: Dariusz Jemielniak
Elected: Lorenzo Losa
2021 Board of Trustees Election Insights
Los facilitadores de Estrategia y Gobernanza del Movimiento publicarán sus opiniones durante el periodo de votación. Esto incluirá el número de votantes y la home-wiki.
Understanding the STV Result
SecurePoll now supports the Single Transferable Vote method. Single Transferable Vote or STV is a ranked voting method that allows voters to specify candidates they want to see elected in order of preference. For SecurePoll, we selected the Meek's implementation with Droop Quota.
Meek's implementation is the most popular for STV elections and is used by several organizations and governments for their elections. The below example uses a more simplified STV implementation (Scottish STV) in order to explain the general concept. A more accurate description of the exact method followed in the implementation can be found here.
- Candidates: Alice, Bob, Charlie, Dave
- Seats: 2
- Voters: 7
|Voter 1||-||3rd preference||2nd preference||1st preference|
|Voter 2||4th preference||3rd preference||1st preference|
|Voter 3||1st preference||3rd preference||4th preference||2nd preference|
|Voter 4||1st preference||2nd preference||3rd preference||4th preference|
|Voter 5||3rd preference||1st preference||4th preference||2nd preference|
|Voter 6||1st preference||2nd preference||-||-|
|Voter 7||1st preference||4th preference||2nd preference||3rd preference|
Droop quota = floor(total valid votes/(seats+1)) + 1 = floor(7/(2+1)) + 1 = 3
- Alice: 4 votes - Elected
- Bob: 1 vote
- Charlie: 0 vote
- Dave: 2 votes
For Round 1, we consider every voter's 1st preference votes. Alice has achieved the Droop quota and is hence declared elected.
- Alice: Elected
- Bob: 1 + 0.5 = 1.5 votes
- Charlie: 0 + 0.25 = 0.25 votes - Eliminated
- Dave: 2 + 0.25 = 2.25 votes
Alice has 1 surplus vote which will be redistributed according to the voter's second preferences. Looking at all of Alice's votes - 2 voters picked Bob second, 1 voter picked Charlie second and 1 voter picked Dave second. Alice's surplus vote is split proportionately. Bob gets 0.5, Charlie gets 0.25 and Dave also gets 0.25 additional vote.
Since no candidate achieves the Droop quota, the candidate with the lowest votes (Charlie) will be eliminated and their votes will be transferred proportionately.
- Alice: Elected
- Bob: 1 + 0.5 + 0 = 1.5 votes = Eliminated
- Charlie: Eliminated
- Dave: 2 + 0.25 + 0.25 = 2.5 votes
Charlie got the lowest votes and was thus eliminated. Since Voter 7 has Dave as their 3rd choice after Alice (already elected) and Charlie (already eliminated), all of Charlie's vote transfers to Dave.
Nobody reaches the Droop quota so once again the candidate with the lowest votes will be eliminated. Hence, Bob is eliminated.
- Alice: Elected
- Bob: Eliminated
- Charlie: Eliminated
- Dave: 2 + 0.25 + 0.25 + 1.5 = 3.75 votes - Elected
Bob received the lowest votes and was thus eliminated. Since voters 4 and 5 have Dave after Bob in their vote profile, a fraction of their votes get transferred to Dave, but since Voter 6 has not specified any candidates other than Alice and Bob (already elected or eliminated), a quarter of their vote gets exhausted.
Dave reaches 3.75 votes which is above the threshold, thus declared elected.
- Elected candidates: Alice and Dave
- Eliminated: Bob and Charlie
Things to note
- If no candidate achieves the Droop quota in a round, the candidate with the lowest votes is eliminated and their votes are re-distributed among remaining candidates in accordance with the voters' ranked preferences.
- If two or more candidates tie for elimination in the final round with one seat remaining, the software allows the election admins or election committee to make a judgement call on how to break the tie.
- Note that the above is a simplified example. In an actual calculation, the Droop quota is recalculated at each round in accordance with the rule stated here.
- If two or more candidates tie for elimination in one of the intermediate rounds, we follow the "Short-cut exclusion rule" as outlined in this paper.
This rule allows us to eliminate candidates when it is mathematically guaranteed that they can never win. This will happen when the candidate's votes don't exceed the votes by the next-best candidate even when they are assigned all the outstanding surplus votes. This seems a fairer method to decide eliminations as compared to randomly eliminating a candidate in the event of a tie.
Note that OpaVote/OpenSTV uses pseudo-random eliminations when it comes to ties. Hence their results may differ from ours in the event of a tie.