On 2023-11-30 00:14 +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 02:23:13PM +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote: > > For the record, I've edited the vote description to make it more clear. > > It now looks like this: > > > > Five people from the list below will become the members of the Technical > > Committee (TC). Assign weights to each person according to how much you > > want them to be in the committee (higher weight = higher preference). > > > > > The system will assume you want to maximise the sum of weights of > > selected candidates. E.g. if X is given a weight of 10 and Y and Z have > > weights 8 and 6 respectively, then the voting algorithm will assume you > > prefer a committee with both Y and Z over one with X, because 14 > 10. > > However, giving Y and Z weight of 4 and 2 instead would have expressed > > that X is preferred to a combination of Y and Z, because 6 < 10. > > My try in cooking word soup: > > The system will assume you want to maximise the sum of weights of the > selected candidates. > > Some examples: > If you give Jerry a weight of 10 and give Tom a weight of 9, that means > you prefer Jerry over Tom because 10 > 9 > If you give Spike a weight of 20 that would mean you not only prefer Spike > over Tom OR Jerry but also over Tom AND Jerry. Because 20 > 10 + 9 > > OTOH if you give Spike a weight of 18 that would mean you prefer Spike over > Tom OR Jerry but you prefer Tom AND Jerry over Spike. > Because: 9 < 10 < 18 < 9 + 10 > Tom < Jerry < Spike < Tom and Jerry
This is similar to the improved notice from Anton, but IMHO makes it a bit more tangible by using person names and by also explaining it in a longer way with AND, OR, and more spacing. Not sure how easy it is to add to the voting and get a proper layout/formatting like in this mail with fixed width though. Also not sure if combined-weights mode and the way it makes voting itself harder (at least the first time one is confronted with it) is worth to keep for the next vote. I personally have no strong opinion. This is not complaint. Alexander _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
