[Ambassadors] FAmSCo election results?

[Caius Chance]

On Wednesday, 13 June 2012, inode0 wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Caius Chanace <me at kaio.net> wrote:
> > On 12/06/12 16:00, Arif Tri Waluyo wrote:
> >>
> >> Additionally: Nick Bebout and Robert 'Bob' Jensen have tied for the
> >> remaining seat; a runoff election will be held to determine the
> >> remaining seat, beginning Tuesday, June 12, and ending Tuesday, June
> >> 19.
> >
> >
> > Very interesting that a tie was reached.
> >
> > As Nick Bebout has won on two elections, has election guidelines
> mentioned
> > about this situation? Just wondering if it had been a common situation
> for
> > this in past? (My personal thought was see if an extra FAmSCo candidate
> from
> > APAC can join. :P)
>
> I don't follow here. Nick was elected to FAmSCo. That has no bearing
> on his being elected to any other governance body and never has had
> any bearing on it.
>
> While this topic comes up every once in a while because some people
> don't like others sitting on multiple governance bodies one way to
> solve that problem is to run yourself.
>
> I would encourage all ambassadors to not be overly focused on regional
> representation. It is nice to have steering committee members from all
> regions but I don't view it as critical. Every single FAmSCo member
> should work hard for ALL ambassadors.
>
> John
> --
> ambassadors mailing list
> ambassadors at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ambassadors


I don't follow there, too.

Running yourself won't solve the problem. There is no problem for running
in multiple governance bodies elections, especially the voting periods are
very close and the results are released at once. This increases the
opportunity to be elected.

However, if a person is elected in more than one governance bodies, why
cannot he/she consider choosing either of the positions for the good of
more opportunity to others? Isn't great to get more Fedorans gaining skills
and experiences of leadership?

Given that there were enough candidates in the elections, saying something
similar to "lack of people interested to take responsibility contributing
in Fedora" for justifying multi appointment is just inaccurate to the
situation. Even everyone was running for elections, it won't eliminate the
case of someone winning more than one elections.

Besides, although board and FAmSCo had not influencing each others'
decisions substantially in past, the structure of Board and FAmSCo is more
like vertical connection. When powers and responsibilities are superset and
subset relationship, why taking 2 spaces rather than introducing more views
and thoughts in either governance bodies?

The focus on regional representation was not my main point here. I am
personally happy to have anyone from any regions, just not the same person
in Board and FAmSCo, or Board and FESCo. There are people ran for elections
who are willing to share the work.

I don't follow there, too.

Regards,
Kaio


-- 
Sent from mobile.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/ambassadors/attachments/20120613/56981133/attachment.html>