On 2012-05-15, at 11:08 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:

> This looks good. I'm not sure if it needs formalizing but in the past elections we used to have an option like "none of the below" which I think was helpful as a minimal bar to pass for a seat on the board. I don't know if it's necessary but you could consider adding it to the proposal (unless that precludes us from choosing other forms of voting, hmm ...)

Yeah. We don't want to specify the mechanism, but if want to empower the community to vote for a board with empty seats despite the availability of candidates to fill them, that should certainly be specified.

This the following enough, or do we need to be more explicit?


7. The Board may operate even though not all of its seats are filled. There may be empty seats if a board member resigns, if there are not enough candidates in the election to fill all 7 seats, or if the community votes to keep seats empty rather than fill them with available candidates.


(Note that this contradicts what I said earlier. Even if there are fewer than 7 candidates, we still need to hold an election every year, because the community might want to vote *against* one or more of the candidates, and have more empty seats than necessary. In fact, it's precisely when there aren't enough candidates to fill the board that "None of the Below" becomes an useful choice - to prevent somebody from being automatically elected.)

Colin