Planning Post F10 Elections

[Josh Boyer]

On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 07:00:50AM -0700, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote:
>
>On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 16:25 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: 
>> On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 13:22 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote:
>> > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 01:17:17AM +1200, Nigel Jones wrote:
>> > > Hi everyone,
>> > > 
>> > 
>> > I like the idea of multiple elections at the same time.  In my
>> > experience, such increases voter turnout (there's more to gain/lose at
>> > one time), while decreasing voter burnout ("another election?  didn't
>> > I just do that last week?").
>> 
>> +1 on this.
>
>+1
>
>> > > It'd appear problems could arise in cases where someone may wish to
>> > > stand for both *SCo and Board simultaneously and only accept one
>> > > nomination.
>> > > 
>> > > Now, I'd assume that this situation would be fairly rare, and in these
>> > > cases we could have the situation where a candidate says "If I get both
>> > > nominations, I'll only accept the one for X", my question is, is this
>> > > acceptable to _you_.
>> > 
>> > To me, yes.
>> 
>> I'd prefer that people not look at multiple elections as a way to hedge
>> bets.  Not that anyone has ever given me that impression of course!  But
>> I'd much rather keep the election as simple and light on regulation as
>> possible, so I'm not about to suggest any additional rules based on my
>> personal feelings.
>
>Sorry, is it *policy* that a person cannot be on the Board and FESCo at
>the same time, or just *practice*?

No policy on it at all.  History shows that we've had several instances of
that situation already.  Recently some people have choosen not to run for
FESCo if elected to the Board, but that is personal preference.

The only reason this wasn't highlighted before is because we've never run
the elections at the same time.  So the choice was made before the FESCo
election even started and we didn't really have the "hm... I got elected to
both and I only want to do one" situation.

josh