From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Results: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Election 2016
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2016 20:38:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5281625.rbgKeEiQ6A@avalon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161103164702.GB56112@clm-mbp>
Hi Chris,
On Thursday 03 Nov 2016 10:47:03 Chris Mason wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 06:06:35PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Thursday 03 Nov 2016 11:39:51 Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >> The TAB elections are now complete. Thank you to all the candidates for
> >> putting their names forward, and a big thank you to Grant Likely, Shuah
> >> Khan, Jes Sorensen, H. Peter Anvin, Chris Mason and the Linux Foundation
> >> staff who helped handle the election logistics.
> >>
> >> With 108 ballots cast, the top 5 candidates received:
> >>
> >> The next highest voted candidate received 44 votes.
> >>
> >> Full results are available on request.
> >
> >Just curious, is there any particular reason to not publish the full
> >results ?
> >
> >Could you also share feedback on the automated ballot counting process
>
> Just nominating yourself and going through an election can be
> uncomfortable, at least it always is for me. We are lucky to have a
> deeply qualified group, and I'd rather focus on encouraging people that
> didn't get elected this time to try again next year.
>
> The ballots were counted by hand. Grant, Steve and Shuah each counted
> every ballot and they verified that everyone got the same results.
>
> We also test drove the optical scanning of the ballots with a tool
> called SDAPS (http://sdaps.org). This was Peter's idea, and it ended up
> working very nicely.
>
> Out of 108 ballots, sdaps missed a single vote and didn't have any false
> positives. The optical scanning was faster than the hand counting, and
> we used the SDAPS gui to verify each ballot, and correct the single
> miss. The gui is the major reason I trusted the result, it's minimal
> but really fast. We used an off-the-shelf scanner, chosen because it
> was the fastest model that fit in my suitcase.
>
> SDAPS recommends latex to design the ballot, and provides macros to make
> it fairly painless. Latex brings its own frustrations, but it worked.
If it wasn't clear from my e-mail, I have complete trust in the TAP to hand
count the ballots. I was curious about how the SDAPS automated process worked
out, thank you for providing feedback about it.
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-03 18:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-03 15:39 Results: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Election 2016 Steven Rostedt
2016-11-03 16:06 ` [Ksummit-discuss] " Laurent Pinchart
2016-11-03 16:47 ` Chris Mason
2016-11-03 18:38 ` Laurent Pinchart [this message]
2016-11-04 12:46 ` Chris Mason
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5281625.rbgKeEiQ6A@avalon \
--to=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=clm@fb.com \
--cc=ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).