The general voting on the possible support for the Debian project petition demanding the resignation of the FSF board and the removal of Stallman has been completed. According to the automatically calculated preliminary results, the seventh item on the ballot won: the project will not make any public statements regarding the FSF and Stallman, and project participants are free to support any petition on this matter.
In addition to the selected position in the vote, there were also items:
- 1. Call for the resignation of the entire FSF board as demanded by the petition against Stallman.
- 2. Call for Stallman's departure from the FSF.
- 3. Limit interactions with the FSF while Stallman remains among the organization's leaders.
- 4. Call on the FSF to reform (increase transparency) its governance processes.
- 5. Support Stallman's return, in accordance with the position expressed in the open letter in support of Stallman.
- 6. Condemn unequivocally the "witch hunt" against Richard Stallman, the FSF board, and the entire organization as a whole.
- 8. Continue the discussion.
Voting in Debian is conducted using the Condorcet method, where each voter ranks all options in order of preference, which allows consideration of not only the "for" position but also the "against" (enabling the selection of the lesser of two evils). When calculating the result, it takes into account how many voters consider one option more preferable than another. Option 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 === === === === === === === === Option 1 113 139 146 218 209 178 203 Option 2 137 168 165 239 227 199 222 Option 3 131 90 150 246 235 199 219 Option 4 156 132 140 259 245 196 221 Option 5 65 57 57 45 59 19 52 Option 6 103 97 92 77 114 30 84 Option 7 223 207 203 197 350 339 277 Option 8 186 166 173 164 328 301 124
For example, looking at the second row in the first column, it is clear that 137 people considered position 2 (Stallman's departure from the FSF) more priority than position 1 (the call for the resignation of the entire FSF leadership), and conversely, in the first row of the second column, it is evident that position 1 was deemed more priority than position 2 β 113 voters. Thus, position 2 surpassed position 1 by 24 votes (137 β 113), meaning the majority consider position 2 better than 1. Similarly, other pairs are calculated, except for items 5 and 6, which did not pass the majority selection. Ultimately, position 7 had more victories (5), making it the leader. Option 2 defeats Option 1 by (137 β 113) = 24 votes. Option 1 defeats Option 3 by (139 β 131) = 8 votes. Option 4 defeats Option 1 by (156 β 146) = 10 votes. Option 7 defeats Option 1 by (223 β 178) = 45 votes. Option 1 defeats Option 8 by (203 β 186) = 17 votes. Option 2 defeats Option 3 by (168 β 90) = 78 votes. Option 2 defeats Option 4 by (165 β 132) = 33 votes. Option 7 defeats Option 2 by (207 β 199) = 8 votes. Option 2 defeats Option 8 by (222 β 166) = 56 votes. Option 3 defeats Option 4 by (150 β 140) = 10 votes. Option 7 defeats Option 3 by (203 β 199) = 4 votes. Option 3 defeats Option 8 by (219 β 173) = 46 votes. Option 7 defeats Option 4 by (197 β 196) = 1 vote. Option 4 defeats Option 8 by (221 β 164) = 57 votes. Option 7 defeats Option 8 by (277 β 124) = 153 votes.
Source: opennet.ru
