Voting System Conflicts

Karl Larsen k5di at
Wed Dec 12 19:14:28 UTC 2007

Karsten Wade wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 07:06 -0800, Karsten Wade wrote:
>> As per this consensus, we'll proceed until the previously decided
>> nomination closing time (23:59 UTC today) to see if enough candidates
>> appear to stand for FDSCo election.  If not, we'll postpone FDSCo
>> elections until the end of the month, freeing up the voting system for
>> others to use.
> I'm a bit torn here, showing my indecisive side quite clearly:
> * We have not enough candidates for an election (3 nominations, 3 seats,
> so voting isn't useful)
    I agree that voting is not required IF the rules accept the current 
situation of no contested seat. But voting might be useful if a voter 
can choose to vote for another person, or vote against the person running.

    If voting is required by rules then do it asap. Before one of the 
three have have cold feet :-)


> * To fill up the nominations is feeling very rushed, with four hours
> left to go
> * People on this project are not fully aware of the election
> * Serious people have put up their names for nomination, and they
> deserve respect and a fair/useful election
> * Putting off until 24 Dec. or later for elections really means we want
> to wait until the New Year, which is _very_far_off_ our schedule of
> "just after the release."  Oops.
> * FAMSCo seems ready to go and chomping at the bit
> * If we postpone we risk losing the momentum we have
> * Someone is potentially upset with the outcome no matter what the
> decision
> Oops, sorry, the last point is just my "place of always being stuck" as
> a leader. :)
> Tick tick tick ...
> - Karsten


	Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
	Linux User
GPG DF28 8F18 94F8 D5C6 9E44  163F 7FD1 3D06 C325 DA40

More information about the docs mailing list