[Systems] #Action Required: Election's 2017-2019 Stage IV Decision on Tool/Platform/server to be used [WAS:Re: Re[2]: Sugar Labs Oversight Board Election Candidates 2017-2019 - Stage III Closed]

[James Cameron]

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 01:20:57PM -0500, Laura Vargas wrote:
> options to vote are:
> 
> A) civs (has been the tool used historically for SL elections)
> B) loomio (will be the first time to be used for SL elections)

Dave, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Loomio requires registration by each Sugar Labs member.  So the
process would be;

1.  Ignacio sends an announcement to each of the members by e-mail,
advising that an invitation will arrive from Loomio,

2.  Ignacio uses Loomio to create a group and a poll, and submits the
list of member e-mail addresses,

3.  Loomio sends an invitation to each member, containing a URL,

4.  member opens the URL, accepts invitation, logs in to Loomio, and
makes their vote in the poll.

5.  member will continue to manage a relationship between themselves
and Loomio.


CIVS is slightly simpler;

1.  Ignacio creates a poll and submits the list of e-mail addresses to
CIVS,

2.  CIVS sends a ballot to each member, containing a URL,

3.  member opens the URL, and makes their vote in the poll.


Missing invitations were previously reported in Sugar Labs elections
when using CIVS, which may have related to CIVS choice of Microsoft's
services for outbound mail.  CIVS may use another bulk mailer now.
Ballots can be resent.

Loomio has complexity that may disengage some members, but it has
great advantage in that it will increase the number of members in our
Loomio group.  Expect a lower turnout.  Invitations can be resent.

Looking back through my archives, CIVS was used;

- by Luke Faraone in December 2012, and December 2013,

- by Caryl Bigenho in January 2016, with 54 votes cast out of 75,


I make no recommendation.  Have at it.

-- 
James Cameron
http://quozl.netrek.org/