Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-project (235 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-project] Revising the Board Election Rules, 2nd iteration
  • From: Andreas Jaeger <aj@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 17:42:13 +0200
  • Message-id: <20100929174213.vyyloh0aowcsk0kg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Rupert Horstkötter <rhorstkoetter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:


2010/9/29 Andreas Jaeger <aj@xxxxxxxxxx>:
On Wednesday 29 September 2010 15:21:14 Rupert Horstkötter wrote:
Also the rule to follow if insufficient nominations occur isn't clear
to me. If I understand this correct, the board would be able to
appoint anyone out of curiosity (incl. the not-voted-for candidate) if
the regular vote fails for some reason. This doesn't lead to community


representation of the board from my perspective and thus need to be
changed to another mechanism.

So far I have not seen any better mechanism than infinite voting ;).  Let me
quote from my first text on this:

We should have a light weight process that is not overly complex and results
in endless votes. We vote for people that volunteer their time for the
openSUSE project and don’t get any material benefits for it. So, let’s keep
that in mind when discussing alternatives.

If you have a better proposal, please speak up - but on a practical level I
think this is the best thing we as project can do to keep the board

It's indeed hard to find a better proposal other than infinite voting.
It wasn't clear to me (out of the posted draft text) that such a
nominated board member would serve just one year as a restriction. IMO

Hi Rupert, this is the rule "Appointment". do you have an idea on how to change the text so that it's clear for everybody? I don't want to confuse anybody and so I need your help on avoiding that.

a good approach to overcome the somehow diminished community
representation. Still, I have one additional question: Would the board
also be able to appoint someone that in advance haven't got the votes
required, i.e. a community-rejected candidate? If so, I'd propose to
exclude such a possibility from the board's opportunities. The text
says "In case that seats do not get elected, the new board will
appoint them" and to my understanding that include such cases atm.
From my perspective this should be changed in order to preserve at
least that kind of community integrity/decision.

My goal was to have simple rules and I think the board would be wise to not appoint somebody that the community voted out. I wanted to give the board as much freedom and appeal to their wisdom on doing a good decisions.

If you and others feel strongly that some kind of restriction should be added, then I'm not opposing it - just not favoring it. so, anybody with strong opinions or reasons for or against such an addition?

Andreas Jaeger, aj@{,}
Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups