Re: Ideas for improving GNOME board elections

[Tobias Mueller <muelli cryptobitch de>]

Hi,

On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 18:07 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
> > > We've discussed some ideas for how to improve in these areas,
> > > including:
> > > Having a template that candidates have to fill in, with short
> > > questions on subjects like availability, relevant expertise and
> > > personal priorities.
> >
> > I think this is a perfect question an interested member can ask, if
> > they
> > so desire.
>
> I'm not entirely sure how to interpret this response: do you think the
> committee should help with the template or not?
I think that whoever wants to have questions answered should ask them.
We do our best to encourage questions and discussions.
I'd avoid a template which candidates have to fill out before being able
to run as I think that increasing the burden on the candidates is
leading to fewer candidates, not more.
I encourage people asking the things they want candidates to have
answered. This is reflected in the announcement email. And availability,
expertise, priorities seem to be good questions the electorate could
ask.
We could probably do a little better reg. encouraging candidates to
produce a meaningful platform. But I'd rather see the electorate
demanding it from the candidates by way of questions rather than have an
authority which decides what a "good" platform is and then reject
candidates whose platform is deemed not good enough.


> ...
> > > Have prepared questions that are pitched to the candidates,
> > > possibly
> > > written by the existing board or outgoing board members
> >
> > Or by anybody else who is interested in doing that.
> > Fortunately, we have such a phase for asking questions in the
> > schedule.
>
> Do we? I've looked at the schedule for the past two elections, and it
> looked like voting starts as soon as the candidates are finalised.
Yes.
Questions can be asked before the list is finalised. This has happened
in the past. Once the list is finalised, people can cast their votes. 
But they can also wait for another week or two, as they don't have to
cast their vote as soon as the list is finalised. I don't think that
introducing a period in which people cannot cast their votes is good,
because it is in an artificial limit with a strictly worse outcome than
the status quo.
Right now, people who want to ask questions and not vote before they
have been answered can do that. Similarly, people who do not or cannot
wait with casting their votes, or simply have all the questions which
are relevant for them answered already, can vote earlier than the very
last day.


Cheers,
  Tobi