Candidate Questionnaire

[inode0]

On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 9:36 AM, Peter Jones <pjones at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 11/08/2010 09:10 PM, inode0 wrote:
>>>From the email sent to the devel and devel-announce mailing lists it says:
>>
>>>> The entire election schedule, and other important information
>>>> for all nominees, is posted on the wiki's main Elections page, and the
>>>> specific nomination pages for the Board and FESCo:
>>
>>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections
>>
>> I think I could have managed to go to the main election page myself
>> with that large clue.
>
> I'm glad you've got so much free time that you can follow every link in
> every email whether or not it's obvious that there's a good reason to. It
> didn't occur to me that reading the general "Elections" page was going to
> be necessary.

We can just disagree about whether too much was asked of the candidates I guess.

>                      Even after reading it, the schedule doesn't make much /sense/.
> Why is the "Publish Questionnaire" date before the end of the nomination
> period? Also most of the time to answer them is as well. There's actually
> more time in the schedule devoted to publishing the questionnaire results
> than the minimum amount of time a candidate, following the schedule, has
> to answer it.

This I completely agree with you about. By moving the deadline for
nominations from the end of the week before your conference to the end
of the week following it the entire schedule makes little sense and
becomes quite difficult to manage. When I asked the board why they
changed that one deadline ironically it was so that candidates would
have ample time to get their nominations in.

>                    Anyway, my point is that this schedule isn't really set up
> or published in a way conducive to having candidates actually follow it
> correctly - in fact given that "Organize/Schedule Town Halls" is on there,
> it doesn't appear to be designed for candidates at all. It's a schedule
> for somebody _running_ elections to follow. It shouldn't surprise anybody
> that the result is that people weren't aware of the deadline for submission.

Ok. I was surprised even though I shouldn't have been.

John