Supervisor: William Leibzon <>
Announced end of poll: Mon Jan 22 19:00:00 UTC 2007
Actual time poll closed: Mon Jan 29 17:13:19 2007
Private poll (27 authorized voters)
Actual votes cast: 26
Number of winning choices:
Condorcet completion rule:    (What is this?)
Schulze/Beatpath/CSSD
CIVS Ranked Pairs
MAM
Condorcet-IRV

Poll description

Choose five individuals to serve at the 2007 SPF Council as described at the elections page.

Note: The "none of those remaining" option gives a voter the opportunity to express disapproval for any candidates. If there is anyone you would not want to see on the council, rank the "none of those remaining" option higher than those you would like to see excluded. If you vote for this choice, it means that you would rather see the elections re-run from scratch than to see the candidates you ranked below the "none" option on the council.

This is a totally optional choice and your vote will have much the same effect whether you choose it or not. The only outcome where it makes a difference is if the "none of those remaining" choice ranks in the top 5, which means that there were four or fewer candidates found "acceptable" by the majority of voters. If you don't see any candidates you want to specifically exclude, and block from serving, or if you don't want to see a second round of nomination and election in any case, don't choose the "none" option.

Result

1. Julian Mehnle  (Condorcet winner: wins contests with all other choices)
2. Scott Kitterman  loses to Julian Mehnle by 14–8
3. Stuart D. Gathman  loses to Julian Mehnle by 17–5, loses to Scott Kitterman by 12–8
4. Frank Ellermann  loses to Julian Mehnle by 18–6, loses to Stuart D. Gathman by 13–6
5. Alex van den Bogaerdt  loses to Julian Mehnle by 21–2, loses to Frank Ellermann by 10–9
6. Mark Shewmaker  loses to Julian Mehnle by 21–1, loses to Alex van den Bogaerdt by 12–9
7. Terry Fielder  loses to Julian Mehnle by 20–3, loses to Mark Shewmaker by 10–4
8. None of those remaining, prefer to hold new elections  loses to Julian Mehnle by 24–0, loses to Terry Fielder by 19–0

For simplicity, some details of the poll result are not shown.  

Result details

  12345678
1. Julian Mehnle   -14 17 18 21 21 20 24
2. Scott Kitterman   8 -12 17 19 19 20 23
3. Stuart D. Gathman   5 8 -13 16 20 20 22
4. Frank Ellermann   6 3 6 -10 13 15 21
5. Alex van den Bogaerdt   2 2 5 9 -12 15 21
6. Mark Shewmaker   1 2 1 7 9 -10 19
7. Terry Fielder   3 2 1 5 6 4 -19
8. None of those remaining, prefer to hold new elections   0 0 0 0 1 0 0 -

Ballot report

 Alex van den Bogaerdt Frank Ellermann Terry Fielder Stuart D. Gathman Scott Kitterman Julian Mehnle Mark Shewmaker None of those remaining, prefer to hold new elections
1. 5 1 2 1 1 3 2 4
2. 6 7 5 1 3 2 4 8
3. 3 4 6 5 2 1 7 8
4. 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
5. 4 5 No opinion 3 2 1 No opinion 8
6. 5 6 7 4 1 2 3 8
7. 2 3 4 3 1 1 4 8
8. 8 7 4 3 2 1 5 8
9. 8 8 8 8 8 1 8 8
10. 4 2 1 8 3 5 8 8
11. 5 6 5 2 4 1 3 8
12. 3 2 5 3 2 1 5 8
13. 2 2 8 2 2 1 8 8
14. 7 3 6 1 2 4 5 8
15. 6 2 8 4 1 3 5 8
16. 4 6 7 2 5 1 3 8
17. 3 3 4 2 1 2 4 8
18. 3 1 7 4 5 2 6 8
19. 6 5 7 3 1 2 4 8
20. No opinion 2 No opinion No opinion 3 1 No opinion No opinion
21. 2 2 8 1 1 1 8 8
22. 4 5 5 2 3 1 5 8
23. 3 2 7 4 1 5 6 8
24. 5 4 7 2 3 1 7 8
25. 2 No opinion 1 1 2 2 2 8
26. 4 8 6 3 2 1 5 8

Ballots are shown in a randomly generated order.

[Download ballots in CSV format]

The following matrix shows the strength of the strongest beatpath connecting each pair of choices. Choice 1 is ranked above choice 2 if there is a stronger beatpath leading from 1 to 2 than any leading from 2 to 1.

  1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.
1. Julian Mehnle   -14–8 17–5 18–6 21–2 21–1 20–3 24–0
2. Scott Kitterman   . -12–8 17–3 19–2 19–2 20–2 23–0
3. Stuart D. Gathman   . . -13–6 16–5 20–1 20–1 22–0
4. Frank Ellermann   . . . -10–9 13–7 15–5 21–0
5. Alex van den Bogaerdt   . . . . -12–9 15–6 21–1
6. Mark Shewmaker   . . . . . -10–4 19–0
7. Terry Fielder   . . . . . . -19–0
8. None of those remaining, prefer to hold new elections   . . . . . . . -