Peter Crowther wrote:

...

Ken Causey and I have asked Daniel whether he's willing to serve as team leader. I'll let Daniel post his thoughts about it. I think he's a good choice.

Just a dumb question. We've just given the Squeak community a process to allow it to select the people who will lead it. That process was agreed after considerable discussion. We have the bootstrapping question of how the elections team itself is constituted - who's in it, who leads it. Is this the most appropriate way of selecting the leader of this team?

I don't think its a dumb question at all. Do we have any candidates from within the team? If other candidates present themselves, I certainly don't mind having a CIVS election for the role.

If you're proposing this as a general mechanism for making teams, we need to consider some general question. Do you think it appropriate to look for candidates outside a team? should the voters be from inside the team, or the whole community (who's aquaintance with candidates is less specific, and who might have better things to do)?

I don't yet know how it is that the voting mechanism should serve the community best - whether to use it directly to make decisions, or just team leadership decisions, or just board elections (and then let them appoint people - this is pretty much what Debian does, btw). In other words, how direct vs. representative we want our democratic aspects to be.

To be clear, I also think Daniel's a good choice. I'm raising an eyebrow at the selection process, not its conclusion.

Thanks, but I agree you raise a relevant choice.

Daniel

...

I'll be stepping down from the Elections Team soon. I've appreciated the chance to lead this team, but don't have the commitment necessary to set aside the time for it.

Sorry to hear that, although it's not unexpected. Thanks for the effort you've put in to lead this team to its first, successful, election. Are you planning to stay as a team member?

No, I'm leaving the team too, although I'll stay on the mailing list.