We are voting to elect the Perl Steering Council. The Steering Council is a 3-person committee, elected by the active members of the Core Team.
The apparent winner of this poll was the set of choices ( 1,2,3 ):
|
There are 56 possible sets of 3 choices that can be formed by selecting from the 8 choices. Of these, 4 sets were considered thoroughly, comparing against the 16 nearby (similar) sets that differ in just one choice.
This is the voting preference matrix, reporting maximal valid proportional preferences. Fractional digits indicate nonproportional preferences, which help break ties in proportional preference.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. (1,2,3) | - | 0.14 | 9.13 | 20.2 | |
| 2. (1,3,4) | 0.07 | - | 9.11 | 15.16 | |
| 3. (1,2,4) | 0.1 | 0.12 | - | 13.15 | |
| 4. (2,3,4) | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.09 | - |
You can compare any two sets of choices. Just enter the numbers of the choices (from 1 to 8) in each set, with the numbers of one set's choices in the left column and the numbers of the other's in the right column.
Strong (proportional) preference: 1,2,3 is preferred by 18 to 0
Weak (nonproportional) preference: 1,2,3 is preferred by 18 to 6
Note: Nonproportional preferences are relevant only if there is a tie in proportional preferences.
The following gives the details of how the poll would have resulted if run on single choices, without proportional representation. This hypothetical poll defines the “individual preference order” used above.
Winning choices are shown in bold.
| 1. Ricardo Signes (Condorcet winner: wins contests with all other choices) |
| 2. Neil Bowers loses to Ricardo Signes by 16–3 |
| 3. Sawyer X loses to Ricardo Signes by 15–9, loses to Neil Bowers by 12–11 |
| 4. Paul Evans loses to Ricardo Signes by 20–1, loses to Sawyer X by 13–10 |
| 5. Leon Timmermans loses to Ricardo Signes by 17–4, loses to Paul Evans by 9–7 |
| 6. Chad Granum loses to Ricardo Signes by 22–1, loses to Leon Timmermans by 13–8 |
| 7. Nicolas Rochelemagne loses to Ricardo Signes by 22–2, loses to Chad Granum by 15–7 |
| 8. Todd Rinaldo loses to Ricardo Signes by 19–5, loses to Nicolas Rochelemagne by 11–6 |
For simplicity, some details of the poll result are not shown.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Ricardo Signes | - | 16 | 15 | 20 | 17 | 22 | 22 | 19 | |
| 2. Neil Bowers | 3 | - | 12 | 14 | 13 | 16 | 19 | 16 | |
| 3. Sawyer X | 9 | 11 | - | 13 | 14 | 13 | 18 | 18 | |
| 4. Paul Evans | 1 | 7 | 10 | - | 9 | 15 | 18 | 17 | |
| 5. Leon Timmermans | 4 | 9 | 10 | 7 | - | 13 | 15 | 18 | |
| 6. Chad Granum | 1 | 4 | 10 | 6 | 8 | - | 15 | 14 | |
| 7. Nicolas Rochelemagne | 2 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 7 | 7 | - | 11 | |
| 8. Todd Rinaldo | 5 | 7 | 4 | 7 | 6 | 8 | 6 | - |
| Sawyer X | Ricardo Signes | Chad Granum | Nicolas Rochelemagne | Neil Bowers | Todd Rinaldo | Leon Timmermans | Paul Evans | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | 7 | 1 | 4 | 8 | 3 | 8 | 2 | 2 |
| 2. | 8 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 1 | 7 | 2 | 2 |
| 3. | 1 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 8 | 7 |
| 4. | 1 | 2 | 6 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 8 | 5 |
| 5. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 7 |
| 6. | 3 | 2 | 7 | 6 | 1 | 8 | 4 | 5 |
| 7. | 8 | 4 | 1 | 7 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 7 |
| 8. | 7 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 3 | 8 | 1 | 4 |
| 9. | 2 | 1 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 8 | 7 | 2 |
| 10. | 1 | 2 | 8 | 5 | 7 | 6 | 4 | 3 |
| 11. | 5 | 3 | 4 | 7 | 2 | 8 | 1 | 6 |
| 12. | 8 | 1 | 2 | 8 | 3 | 8 | 1 | 1 |
| 13. | 3 | 1 | 8 | 8 | 4 | 8 | 5 | 2 |
| 14. | 7 | 1 | 2 | 8 | 1 | 8 | 2 | 4 |
| 15. | 1 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 6 | 2 | 8 | 4 |
| 16. | 8 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 1 | 8 | 1 | 1 |
| 17. | 1 | 2 | 8 | 6 | 4 | 7 | 3 | 5 |
| 18. | 2 | 4 | 7 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 8 | 6 |
| 19. | 3 | 2 | 7 | 4 | 1 | 8 | 4 | 4 |
| 20. | 6 | 1 | 5 | 8 | 1 | 8 | 1 | 1 |
| 21. | 7 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 8 | 2 | 2 |
| 22. | 2 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 4 | 1 | 8 | 6 |
| 23. | 1 | 4 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 2 | 3 |
| 24. | 2 | 1 | 7 | 4 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 5 |
Ballots are shown in a randomly generated order.
[Download ballots in CSV format]
Feel like voting on something else? Try one of these public polls: