Re: changed charter, new elections proposal
- From: Bart Decrem <bart eazel com>
- To: George <jirka 5z com>
- Cc: James Henstridge <james daa com au>, foundation-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: changed charter, new elections proposal
- Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 21:19:40 -0700
George wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 08:39:12PM -0700, Bart Decrem wrote:
> > Optional: If people like my amendment to Jon and Dan's idea, the script would
> > spit out an election update every day during the 7 days of the election.
> > That way you can see what the board might look like before you cast your
> > vote. That might help us get a more balanced board.
>
> I think this has two drawbacks
>
> 1) people will not bother to vote because it will seem like things are
> already decided
> OR
> 2) people will wait till the end to vote to see wha the composition is so
> they can have a "balanced" board.
>
> I actually like Jon and Dan's original idea the most. Elect the board in a
> couple of increments.
good feedback. let's see what others say (but I think jon & dan's idea is too
complicated. Let's KISS: keep it stupid simple.)
> Another issue: How would the "no company should have majority" thing be
> handeled with direct elections. Perhaps: Only the most popular 5 (for an 11
> member board) people from each company are considered.
Yes. I wrote that in the revised charter in a clumsy way, but you just said it
more eloquently.
> Also. How will we decide if some two people get the same amount of votes?
> That is, if this would make us decide between two people. Perhaps a "runoff"
> would be needed.
I guess if those two people were tied for slot #11 we would need a run-off.
brrr. I hope that doesn't happen.
Bart
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]