All translations

Enter a message name below to show all available translations.

Found 4 translations.

Name	Current message text
^h German (de)	* [[Talk:Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Community Board seats/Ranked voting system#Support%2C%20NOW%20OPPOSE%20ranked%20choice%2C%20preferably%20Schulze%20or%20other%20Condorcet%20method\|Eine Person auf der Ideen-Talkseite auf Meta sagte]], "Transferable vote ist ein schlechtes Vorzugswahlsystem...vielleicht können wir darüber diskutieren, ein System zu erfinden, das sowohl eine Oppositionsoption als auch ein Ranking beinhaltet." * Ein [[Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Community Board seats/Conversations/Topic panels/Topic panel: Board - Global Council - Hubs/Report\|Freiwilliger in der "Board-Global Council-Hubs"-Runde]] sprach sich für diese Idee für die kommende Board-Wahl aus, mit einigen ziemlich lockeren Quoten der Repräsentation, weil das Unterstützungs-/Gegner-Abstimmungssystem den Gegenstimmen ein furchtbar großes Gewicht gibt. Und, der Freiwillige sagte, dass ohne Vorzugsstimmen oder Quoten die Wahlen dazu führen werden, dass sehr ähnliche Arten von Leuten gewählt werden. * Aus dem anonymen Feedback-Formular: Sie raten dringend dazu, das Ranglisten-Wahlsystem zu wählen, das bereits in vielen Situationen verwendet wird (wie bei den Vorstandswahlen der Open Street Map Foundation), was der Gemeinschaft die volle Macht gibt.
^h English (en)	* [[Talk:Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Community Board seats/Ranked voting system#Support%2C%20NOW%20OPPOSE%20ranked%20choice%2C%20preferably%20Schulze%20or%20other%20Condorcet%20method\|One person on the idea talk page on Meta said]], “Transferable vote is a bad ranked system...maybe we can discuss trying to invent a system that included both an oppose option and ranking.” * One [[Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Community Board seats/Conversations/Topic panels/Topic panel: Board - Global Council - Hubs/Report\|volunteer in the "Board-Global Council-Hubs" panel]] session was in favor of this idea for the upcoming board election, with some fairly loose quotas of representation, because the support/oppose voting system puts an awful lot of weight on opposing votes. And, the volunteer said that without preferential voting or quotas then the elections will result in very similar kinds of people being elected. * From the anonymous feedback form: they strongly advise choosing the ranked voting system which is already used in many situations (as the Open Street Map Foundation board elections), which gives the community the full power.
^h French (fr)	* [[Talk:Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Community Board seats/Ranked voting system#Support%2C%20NOW%20OPPOSE%20ranked%20choice%2C%20preferably%20Schulze%20or%20other%20Condorcet%20method\|Une personne sur la page de discussion de l'idée sur Meta dit]], “Le vote transférable est un mauvais système de classement... Nous pourrions peut-être discuter de la possibilité d'inventer un système qui inclurait à la fois une option d'opposition et un classement.” * Un [[Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Community Board seats/Conversations/Topic panels/Topic panel: Board - Global Council - Hubs/Report\|volontaire dans le panel sur "Board-Conseil global-Hubs" panel]] was in favor of this idea for the upcoming board election, with some fairly loose quotas of representation, because the support/oppose voting system puts an awful lot of weight on opposing votes. And, the volunteer said that without preferential voting or quotas then the elections will result in very similar kinds of people being elected. * Dans le formulaire anonyme de l'appel à commentaires: ils conseillent vivement de choisir le système de vote par classement, qui est déjà utilisé dans de nombreuses situations (comme les élections du conseil d'administration de la Fondation Open Street Map), et qui donne à la communauté tout son pouvoir.
^h Korean (ko)	* [[Talk:Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Community Board seats/Ranked voting system#Support%2C%20NOW%20OPPOSE%20ranked%20choice%2C%20preferably%20Schulze%20or%20other%20Condorcet%20method\|메타의 아이디어 토론 페이지에 있는 한 사람]]은 "양도 가능한 투표는 나쁜 순위 시스템입니다... 아마도 반대 옵션과 순위를 모두 포함하는 시스템을 고안하는 것에 대해 논의할 수 있을 것입니다."라고 말했습니다. * "[[Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Community Board seats/Conversations/Topic panels/Topic panel: Board - Global Council - Hubs/Report\|이사회-글로벌 협의회-허브" 패널 세션의 한 자원봉사자]]는 상당히 느슨한 대표 할당량과 함께 다가오는 이사회 선거에 대한 이 아이디어에 찬성했습니다. 왜냐하면 지지/반대 투표 시스템이 반대자에게 엄청난 비중을 두기 때문입니다. 투표. 그리고 자원봉사자는 우선투표나 할당량이 없으면 선거에서 매우 유사한 종류의 사람들이 선출될 것이라고 말했습니다. * 익명 피드백 양식에서: 커뮤니티에 모든 권한을 부여하는 오픈스트리트맵 재단 이사회 선거와 같이 이미 많은 상황에서 사용되는 순위 투표 시스템을 선택할 것을 강력히 권장합니다.