election details (was "Squeak Foundation Board 2007 Candidates")

Roel Wuyts Roel.Wuyts at ulb.ac.be
Tue Feb 20 08:28:10 UTC 2007


Yes, I think that is a clean way to approach this.

In my opinion it is not the task of an election committee to prepare  
questions or start a discussion (no matter how well the intentions,  
as in this case). It is the task of the committee to help the process  
though: setting up a wiki, provide a resume with all the names of the  
candidates, ask all the candidates for a small abstract of their  
plans and a link to more detailed information, etc.

The rest is up to the candidates and the voters: candidates can do a  
campaign (if they want to!). Voters can ask questions using this very  
mailing list, and candidates can then reply (or not, if they consider  
this to be their strategy). Since voting is not obligatory this is  
ok. Yes, it will be messy (e.g. lots of mails), so the committee  
could ask to use a special tag in the subject of vote-related  
messages, and try to manage it (e.g. from time to time remind people  
to use this tag).

On 19 Feb 2007, at 19 February/20:45, Daniel Vainsencher wrote:

> Hi everyone.
>
> I think the discussion phase between finding candidates and voting  
> should allow both voters and candidates to form some expectations  
> about what is going to happen in the next term. In this light, I  
> think Ron, like me, wants only to help this process along, but a  
> list of questions may constrict, rather than help.
>
> And in this particular phase of the election, I think our place  
> should only to help. So I propose that we step back and let the  
> mailing list do its job. I will propose that the election team will  
> create a wiki page documenting the election, including having a  
> list of candidates. If each candidate sends us an appropriate link,  
> voters will have some handy reference material at the time of the  
> vote.
>
> Sound good?
>
> Daniel
>
> Brad Fuller wrote:
>> Craig Latta wrote:
>>> Hi Ron--
>>>
>>>> We have a short time to find out more about these candidates before
>>>> the election. I will be sending the same questions to each  
>>>> candidate
>>>> and will publish a final article...
>>>
>>>      You posed a set of candidate questions earlier which were quite
>>> loaded; in particular, they conveyed a certain point of view of  
>>> yours,
>>> and effectively asked whether or not the candidate agrees with  
>>> you. :)
>>> This didn't seem so good. Much better (but potentially a lot of  
>>> work),
>>> would be to compile a set of top-asked questions from the  
>>> community, a
>>> la Slashdot. I don't think it's right for one person to claim  
>>> authority
>>> for deciding what questions to ask. Certainly the questions could  
>>> be better.
>>
>> I don't recall the questions. But your suggestions are good.
>>
>>>> In the mean time I encourage people to support your favorite
>>>> candidate! Please post a recommendation for your favorite  
>>>> candidate,
>>>> include details about that candidate that people may not know.
>>>
>>>      Hm, I'm not sure this is such a great idea either. :)  As a  
>>> voter,
>>> I'm most interested in what each candidate is motivated to say on  
>>> their
>>> own behalf. And the candidates should probably decide what new facts
>>> about themselves to present. It seems most fair to let the  
>>> candidates
>>> speak for themselves.
>>
>> And, it could get ugly. There has been some finger pointing in the  
>> past. Most messages, though, show respect for others.
>>
>> Better safe than sorry and maybe collect a list of questions,  
>> shuffle them in random list order, and let each candidate answer,  
>> if they so choose to.
>>
>>
>>
>
>




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list