Interesting approach. I personally like it (but I am not a voting member). I assume that we are all aware of the fact that in this case the option that has the relative majority might not be the winner. For instance, having 17 votes, we might have: 5 - 3 votes 7 - 3 votes 9 - 3 votes all - 8 votes and the winner will be 9 (not all). Similarly, if we have: 5 - 8 votes 7 - 3 votes 9 - 3 votes all - 3 votes the winner will be 7 (not 5). This has the advantage of favouring the central area of the spectrum, minimizing the global unhappiness instead of maximizing the local happiness. It is worthed noting that if you start from the other end, i.e. from 5, and go up, stopping when you have the majority of the valid votes, you will end at the same point (if my maths are correct). Cheers, Roberto _____ From: euro-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:euro-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Dr. Christoph Bruch Sent: 18 May 2007 21:00 To: 'Discussion for At-Large Europe' Subject: [EURO-Discuss] Vote for EURALO board size Dear all, I was asked by several people how we would count the votes for the size of the EURALO board. According to my understanding we start with the "include all" option. If this option does not reach the majority, these votes will be added to the "membership of 9" votes. If this option does not reach the majority, these votes will be added to the "membership of 7" votes. ... Christoph