Seeking clarification on the FDSCo Elections

[Paul W. Frields]

On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 13:15 +0300, John Babich wrote: 
> FDP Team Members:
> 
> We need to decide whether to go ahead with the FDSCo election or
> postpone it to a future date.
> 
> First, I would like to bring up some unfinished business:
> 
> On 2/3/07, Karsten Wade <kwade at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > We need to approach some people who are hesitant about putting
> > themselves in.  Relative newcomers are welcome, but may not know it.
> >
> 
> As a relative newcomer myself, I would encourage people to dive in.
> I know that there is a great deal I need to learn in order to better
> contribute to the Fedora Docs Project. IMHO, the best way to learn
> is by doing. Please consider getting involved by nominating yourself
> for the FDP steering committee.

+1.

> > > 9. If there are still less than 7 candidates, then voting will take
> > > place with the number of candidates posted (doc #2).
> >
> > Yes, but we can review if this still makes sense.  We are not in such a
> > hurry as to require making bad decisions. :)
> >
> 
> I would like to extend the period for nominations so that more people,
> including Karsten :-) , can put their names on the ballot.

Note to anyone wanting to sign up for nominations -- do it NOW!  Takes
only a few minutes to put your name on the list.  Even if you write only
a short one-sentence blurb about yourself, at least put yourself in for
consideration.  You don't have to write a novel to be considered a
candidate. :-)

> > We have always used the 23:59 UTC on the calendar date specified.  Makes
> > sense?
> >
> 
> Perfect sense - now I know the standard. Let's put it on the web page so that
> it is an "open" standard. :-)
> 
> > > 2. WIll the next wave of self-nominations close on 6 February or 9 February?
> >
> > Ouch, I cannot figure this out right now, brain tired.  Let's decide
> > this in the morning.
> >
> 
> It is now 6 February. Do we go with 9 February or do we reschedule the
> election? I would prefer to go ahead with the election, if possible.
> 
> Of course, we all need to be crystal-clear on the rules. How can we clarify
> them quickly?

The current policy is clear that there's a one-week delay, then we have
the election and simply confirm the existing nominations to start with
if we're at fewer than the number of seats open.  Of course, that policy
reads "proposal" at the top, so that makes it a little... er, less
clear.

I therefore make a counterproposal: We reschedule for nominations
closing on the 13th, elections starting on the 16th (2359 UTC all
dates).  This gives us time to address this at a FDSCo meeting tonight
if possible, or at worst, here on the list, which is understandably a
little quiet since we all wore ourselves out at FUDCon.

I'll also suggest at the meeting that we discuss the proposal, which
didn't get a lot of uptake here on the list.  Join us at #fedora-docs if
you're able.

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE                          http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
       Fedora Project Board: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board
    Fedora Docs Project:  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/attachments/20070206/fefed041/attachment.sig>