[fedora-commops] Issue #102 ` Improving Fedora Elections Process: Nomination process`

[Pagure]

cprofitt reported a new issue against the project: `fedora-commops` that you are
following:
``
These ideas were taken from ticket #90; the focus of this ticket is the nomination
process.

---- ideas from #90 ----
* automating communications with nominees
   - verify that they are accepting nomination
   - communicate the 'campaign' process (ie., interview on commops, etc)

* use the same tool as the election tool or automate the creation of the ballot to avoid
FAS name errors

* way to determine what teams would like to hold elections
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/fedora-commops/issue/102

[Justin W. Flory]

The issue: ` Improving Fedora Elections Process: Nomination process` of project:
`fedora-commops` has been assigned to `jflory7` by jflory7.

https://pagure.io/fedora-commops/issue/102

[Justin W. Flory]

jflory7 added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
**Discussed in [2017-02-07
meeting](https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/commops/commops.2017-02-...

# Long-term: Improving Elections app

One thing we identified as being most helpful to solve this problem is having support
built into the [Elections app](https://pagure.io/elections) for nominating candidates and
submitting questions. Ideally, it would be easier to bundle the election process all into
one place, instead of using wiki pages to maintain and update this information (which can
be confusing and counter-intuitive sometimes).

RFEs were filed upstream in the Elections app as [ticket
47](https://pagure.io/elections/issue/47) (nominations), [ticket
48](https://pagure.io/elections/issue/48) (questionnaire), and [ticket
49](https://pagure.io/elections/issue/49) (eligibility requirement checking). More
complete descriptions of these ideas can be found in those tickets.

# Short-term: Maintaining the bar

This past release cycle, I feel like we did well in communicating the nomination process.
FAmSCo had [thirteen
nominees](https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/results/famsco-jauary-2017) for seven
seats, the Council had [five
nominees](https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/results/council-january-... for one
seat, and FESCo had [seven
nominees](https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/results/fesco-january-2017) for five
seats. In @jkurik's
[retrospective](https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/elections-retrospe...
on the Community Blog, this was one of the most participated elections in Fedora history
as well. So clearly we are on the right track! But there is always room for improvement.

### To maintain…

So, _to maintain_, we need to keep doing:

* Community Blog posts announcing the nomination, campaign, and election results
* Reminder posts on the announcement mailing list about election deadlines
* Social media posts for election deadlines

### To grow…

One thing we can try to do better for the next release cycle is communicating the presence
of the questionnaire on the wiki and encourage community members to add their own
questions they want answered by candidates. Better communicating the questionnaire, I
feel, will correspond to increased readership of the actual interviews too. But we should
factor this into our messaging for the next election cycle to see if we can gather more
interest in questions for nominees next time.

# Encourage nominations by current members?

Also an idea that came to me, partially motivated by discussion elsewhere, should we
directly propose the idea of every existing member of an electable body in Fedora try
nominating someone or many people to take their place (but a minimum of one)? Obviously
this isn't something CommOps would take care of, but we could file upstream tickets to
the Council, FESCo, and FAmSCo to consider making this an official policy of their own.

I'm curious to know what others think about this!
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/fedora-commops/issue/102

[Justin W. Flory]

jflory7 added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
**Discussed in [2017-02-07
meeting](https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/commops/commops.2017-02-...

# Long-term: Improving Elections app

One thing we identified as being most helpful to solve this problem is having support
built into the [Elections app](https://pagure.io/elections) for nominating candidates and
submitting questions. Ideally, it would be easier to bundle the election process all into
one place, instead of using wiki pages to maintain and update this information (which can
be confusing and counter-intuitive sometimes).

RFEs were filed upstream in the Elections app as [ticket
47](https://pagure.io/elections/issue/47) (nominations), [ticket
48](https://pagure.io/elections/issue/48) (questionnaire), and [ticket
49](https://pagure.io/elections/issue/49) (eligibility requirement checking). More
complete descriptions of these ideas can be found in those tickets.

# Short-term: Maintaining the bar

This past release cycle, I feel like we did well in communicating the nomination process.
FAmSCo had [thirteen
nominees](https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/results/famsco-jauary-2017) for seven
seats, the Council had [five
nominees](https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/results/council-january-... for one
seat, and FESCo had [seven
nominees](https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/results/fesco-january-2017) for five
seats. In @jkurik's
[retrospective](https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/elections-retrospe...
on the Community Blog, this was one of the most participated elections in Fedora history
as well. So clearly we are on the right track! But there is always room for improvement.

### To maintain…

So, _to maintain_, we need to keep doing:

* Community Blog posts announcing the nomination, campaign, and election results
* Reminder posts on the announcement mailing list about election deadlines
* Social media posts for election deadlines

### To grow…

One thing we can try to do better for the next release cycle is communicating the presence
of the questionnaire on the wiki and encourage community members to add their own
questions they want answered by candidates. Better communicating the questionnaire, I
feel, will correspond to increased readership of the actual interviews too. But we should
factor this into our messaging for the next election cycle to see if we can gather more
interest in questions for nominees next time.

# Encourage nominations by current members?

Also an idea that came to me, partially motivated by discussion elsewhere, should we
directly propose the idea of every existing member of an electable body in Fedora try
nominating someone or many people to take their place (but a minimum of one)? Obviously
this isn't something CommOps would take care of, but we could file upstream tickets to
the Council, FESCo, and FAmSCo to consider making this an official policy of their own.

I'm curious to know what others think about this!
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/fedora-commops/issue/102

[Justin W. Flory]

The issue: ` Improving Fedora Elections Process: Nomination process` of project:
`fedora-commops` has been reset by jflory7.

https://pagure.io/fedora-commops/issue/102

[Justin W. Flory]

jflory7 added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
**Discussed in [2017-02-07
meeting](https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/commops/commops.2017-02-...

# Long-term: Improving Elections app

One thing we identified as being most helpful to solve this problem is having support
built into the [Elections app](https://pagure.io/elections) for nominating candidates and
submitting questions. Ideally, it would be easier to bundle the election process all into
one place, instead of using wiki pages to maintain and update this information (which can
be confusing and counter-intuitive sometimes).

RFEs were filed upstream in the Elections app as [ticket
47](https://pagure.io/elections/issue/47) (nominations), [ticket
48](https://pagure.io/elections/issue/48) (questionnaire), and [ticket
49](https://pagure.io/elections/issue/49) (eligibility requirement checking). More
complete descriptions of these ideas can be found in those tickets.

# Short-term: Maintaining the bar

This past release cycle, I feel like we did well in communicating the nomination process.
FAmSCo had [thirteen
nominees](https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/results/famsco-jauary-2017) for seven
seats, the Council had [five
nominees](https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/results/council-january-... for one
seat, and FESCo had [seven
nominees](https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/results/fesco-january-2017) for five
seats. In @jkurik's
[retrospective](https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/elections-retrospe...
on the Community Blog, this was one of the most participated elections in Fedora history
as well. So clearly we are on the right track! But there is always room for improvement.

### To maintain…

So, _to maintain_, we need to keep doing:

* Community Blog posts announcing the nomination, campaign, and election results
* Reminder posts on the announcement mailing list about election deadlines
* Social media posts for election deadlines

### To grow…

One thing we can try to do better for the next release cycle is communicating the presence
of the questionnaire on the wiki and encourage community members to add their own
questions they want answered by candidates. Better communicating the questionnaire, I
feel, will correspond to increased readership of the actual interviews too. But we should
factor this into our messaging for the next election cycle to see if we can gather more
interest in questions for nominees next time.

# Encourage nominations by current members?

Also an idea that came to me, partially motivated by discussion elsewhere, should we
directly propose the idea of every existing member of an electable body in Fedora try
nominating someone or many people to take their place (but a minimum of one)? Obviously
this isn't something CommOps would take care of, but we could file upstream tickets to
the Council, FESCo, and FAmSCo to consider making this an official policy of their own.

I'm curious to know what others think about this!
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/fedora-commops/issue/102

[Justin W. Flory]

The issue: ` Improving Fedora Elections Process: Nomination process` of project:
`fedora-commops` has been assigned to `jflory7` by jflory7.

https://pagure.io/fedora-commops/issue/102