Computing results...

Supervisor: Anton Khirnov <>
Announced end of poll: 2024-12-17
Actual time poll closed:
Private poll (52 authorized voters)
Actual votes cast: 30
Number of winning choices:
This poll implements proportional representation. The combined-weights criterion is used to identify each voter's preferred set of choices.
Condorcet completion rule:    (What is this?)
SchulzeSTV with proportional representation

Poll description

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 maximize the sum of weights of selected candidates.

If you want to keep things simple and just rank people individually, give them weights that are successive powers of two. I.e. your least favored candidate gets 1, then 2, 4, 8, 16, and the most favored gets 32. If you do that, feel free to ignore the text below.

A more complex example
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

Relevant ML thread.

Choices (in individual preference order)

  1. Martin Storsjö
  2. Michael Niedermayer
  3. Anton Khirnov
  4. Niklas Haas
  5. Jan Ekström
  6. Alexander Strasser

Winning set of choices

The apparent winner of this poll was the set of choices ( 1,2,3,4,5 ):

  1. Martin Storsjö
  2. Michael Niedermayer
  3. Anton Khirnov
  4. Niklas Haas
  5. Jan Ekström

Preference matrix

There are 6 possible sets of 5 choices that can be formed by selecting from the 6 choices. Of these, 6 sets were considered thoroughly, comparing against the 6 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.

  123456
1. (1,2,3,4,5)   -0.2 0.22 20.2 16.19 10.18
2. (1,2,3,4,6)   0.06 -0.13 17.18 16.19 10.15
3. (1,2,3,5,6)   0.05 0.07 -15.15 15.16 10.13
4. (1,2,4,5,6)   0.08 0.07 0.11 -0.13 11.15
5. (2,3,4,5,6)   0.05 0.05 0.09 0.09 -11.11
6. (1,3,4,5,6)   0.06 0.11 0.13 0.12 0.14 -

Pairwise comparison

You can compare any two sets of choices. Just enter the numbers of the choices (from 1 to 6) 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.

Set 1Set 2

Nonproportional poll

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.

Ranking of the choices

Winning choices are shown in bold.

The  1. place goes to candidate F: Alexander Strasser
The  2. place goes to candidate E: Jan Ekström
The  3. place goes to candidate C: Anton Khirnov
The  4. place goes to candidate A: Michael Niedermayer
The  5. place goes to candidate D: Niklas Haas
The  6. place goes to candidate B: Martin Storsjö

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

Result details

Ballot report

 Michael Niedermayer Martin Storsjö Anton Khirnov Niklas Haas Jan Ekström Alexander Strasser
741: 2 2 2 1 1 0
7291792: 4 1 0 2 0 8
975864: 749 999 0 999 599 0
: 9 8 7 5 6 0
: 0 0 0 0 0 0
37854: 2 16 8 4 6 2
162988: 10 10 10 5 5 0
200: 1 1 0 1 1 1
: 32 16 1 8 4 2
13780452186: 2 32 16 8 4 0
0: 2 16 32 8 16 0
: 16 8 8 32 2 1
: 2 16 32 4 8 1
83680292: 32 16 8 1 2 4
: 5 3 1 2 6 4
: 90 100 100 100 80 70
: 999 200 500 700 200 200
: 0 1 4 2 2 0
9336: 999 55 0 888 66 777
: 32 1 16 8 0 1
: 0 16 32 8 4 2
7377: 8 16 32 32 32 16
66661: 9 9 5 9 9 9
3490: 0 64 64 16 16 8
: 100 10 10 35 10 50
9834: 16 32 0 0 0 64
: 1 4 4 1 1 0
: 5 7 8 12 9 5
6758: 0 300 200 100 50 10
: 32 8 16 2 4 1

Ballots are shown in a randomly generated order.

[Download ballots in CSV format]

[Download ballots in DAT format]

Candidates in original order: 
A: Michael Niedermayer
B: Martin Storsjö
C: Anton Khirnov
D: Niklas Haas
E: Jan Ekström
F: Alexander Strasser


A 0.000000 16.800000 13.333333 15.000000 12.692308 7.500000
B 13.200000 0.000000 12.272727 10.800000 6.250000 6.250000
C 16.666667 17.727273 0.000000 12.692308 8.400000 8.571429
D 15.000000 19.200000 17.307692 0.000000 10.500000 5.555556
E 17.307692 23.750000 21.600000 19.500000 0.000000 6.923077
F 22.500000 23.750000 21.428571 24.444444 23.076923 0.000000
The 1. place goes to candidate F.

A 0.000000 12.546296 10.714286 12.222222 11.538462
B 11.805556 0.000000 10.925884 10.800000 6.250000
C 12.543103 14.465125 0.000000 12.692308 8.400000
D 12.361111 12.986111 11.012694 0.000000 10.500000
E 12.361111 13.605769 11.831527 13.694444 0.000000
The 2. place goes to candidate E.

A 0.000000 9.147673 7.887685 9.129630
B 8.240741 0.000000 7.903448 9.129630
C 8.362069 9.854032 0.000000 9.556194
D 8.240741 9.440883 7.887685 0.000000
The 3. place goes to candidate C.

A 0.000000 7.444404 7.167146
B 6.271552 0.000000 7.167146
D 6.271552 7.390524 0.000000
The 4. place goes to candidate A.

B 0.000000 5.733716
D 5.955523 0.000000
The 5. place goes to candidate D.

The 6. place goes to candidate B.