Post #4303039

2026-08-01 04:37 UTC

Obviously, electing them via STV is much better than the alternative: I remember in primary school we elected two class representatives to the student council every year (I don't know why; unlike highschool I don't remember ever hearing from the council outside of this). It being the 2000s, all the boys* in the class voted for boys ('what are you, gay?' was the implication if not the explicit words, this not being a secret ballot), and all the girls voted for girls, so if there were two girls running and three or more boys, the girls got in, and vice versa. FSU have so far only ever put in two candidates at a time, while the opposition is not coordinated, so they would win via a more first-past-the-post system *gender not accurate, obviously; I wasn't bucking this trend for one

Replies (1)

@PetraOleum@cloudisland.nz 2026-08-01 04:44

The way to mess with this process to favour a smaller majority than two thirds - which INZ obviously have not done, despite insinuations - is to change up the number of board positions for election at the same time in some way. For example, if a single position went up for election every six months (or, each position was voted for independently) a simple majority would be needed to win, and the function of the runoff voting would just be to ensure the winner actually had a majority rather than a plularity. If it was four positions every two years meanwhile the minority position would be all but guaranteed a board position (assuming they could muster a bare 20% of the vote) but they would be much more likely to be outvoted 3:1 on the board by a coalition that could consistently muster 60%.

Open ##4303277