| 1 |
>>>>> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, Roy Bamford wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> As for visibility, its a perennial problem. Look at the years when |
| 4 |
> no vote is held and nominees are elected unopposed. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I would much prefer if we had an actual vote even in such cases, with |
| 7 |
a _reopen_nominations marker. That way, the newly elected trustees |
| 8 |
would at least have a mandate by the electorate. Without a vote, it |
| 9 |
almost resembles a normal project where members can just join. IMHO |
| 10 |
the threshold for trustees should be higher than that. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Also, I wonder if legal problems wouldn't rather arise from the |
| 13 |
absence of _reopen_nominations? IIUC, countify will implicitly add any |
| 14 |
missing candidates to the end of a ballot. So there is no way to vote |
| 15 |
against a candidate. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Ulrich |
Archives