Re: Updating BCP 10 -- round two

[Michael StJohns <[e-mail]>]

At 02:11 PM 2/11/2015, Michael Richardson wrote:
>Let me propose one quantitative way in which a larger pool is good: it
>reduces the odds of hitting the no-more-than-2 rule, and it also may reduce
>the number of 2-from-one-company that occurs.  This is something we could
>check: compare size of pool each year to how often there was two people from
>one entity, or when a person had to be turned away as the third.



*sigh* No.

The only factor as to whether you hit the no-more-than-2 rule is the proportion of volunteers you have in the volunteer pool, not the size of the volunteer pool.

 From the binomial distribution, if a company has 30% of the volunteer pool, it has a 2.8% chance of having no members, a 12.1% chance of having 1 member and a 85.1% chance of having 2. (That last number is the sum of the percentages from 2-10 members).

So a big pool does not improve the distribution.

Later, Mike