Re: Term duration for board members (was GNOME Board of Directors Foundation Elections 2017 - Candidates)


On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 7:10 PM, meg ford <meg387 gmail com> wrote:
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Alexandre Franke <afranke gnome org>

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Michael Catanzaro
<mike catanzaro gmail com> wrote:
Here's another question: what do the candidates think about switching to
using two-year terms?

I think this is an interesting idea, but I think we'd have to know why
people aren't running in the first place to know if it would be an effective
solution. For example, if few people are running because they are hesitant
about the time commitment, then having two year terms might exacerbate that.
I agree that there haven't been enough candidates the past few elections,
and some action should be taken to solve the issue. I'd like to hear why
people who considered running didn't do so, and what would make them
consider running in the future.

I agree with Meg, first and foremost we need to identify the reasoning
behind not so many people launching candidacies.

Addressing directly the $SUBJECT, I personally believe that despite
the lack of candidates, a transition of responsibilities is key for a
wealthy system. It gives new people a chance to push their ideas,
prevents the creation of privileges, and gives credibility to the
voters. I acknowledge that the board power is somehow limited and it
is often just "representative", but even in this matters I would
always welcome an alternation of members in a short period.


foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list gnome org

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]