But surely almost every election involves an element of tactical voting? Third candidates in US Presidential elections don't get as many votes as they deserve because many people will vote for their second choice to avoid the really bad guy getting in.

So in my example above I have a choice:

a) Too many candidates about which I know nothing, and I don't have the time to find out enough about 30+ candidates to feel qualified to vote. Hope that the people who do know enough about the candidates have views similar to mine.

b) My dislike for the three that I don't want on the board is such that it overrides my preference for the two, and it is not clear who are the candidates most likely to beat the ones I dislike. In this case I should vote for everyone except the three I don't like.

c) As b) but there are clear favourites amongst the people I don't know. In this case I should vote for these favourites.

d) My preference for the two is sufficiently strong that it overrides my dislike for the three. In this case I just vote for the two I like.

e) A compromise between c) & d) - I vote for the favourites and the two I like.

In the end last year I have to admit that I took option a) and hoped. Unfortunately, that didn't give the result I had hoped for, but then the activities of the Talkboard haven't had any impact that I am aware of on my enjoyment of FT, so maybe it doesn't matter anyway.