Vincent Untz | 1 Dec 06:52 2005
Picon

Re: Endorsements one by one [was Re: Endorsing David Neary]

On mer, 2005-11-30 at 18:12 +0000, Alan Horkan wrote:
> To change the subject slightly I'd be interested to know how good the
> turnout has been so far if it is not too much trouble for the Electoral
> committee to provide that kind of preliminary information.

(I'm not wearing my membership committee hat and when I say "committee",
please consider I'm not the one doing the work)

The committee can do it (it's just a single sql query). I'm just not
sure if it's okay to provide this information (although I don't see any
reason why it wouldn't be okay). Is there any objection to this idea?

Vincent

--

-- 
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
Richard M. Stallman | 1 Dec 07:04 2005
Picon
Picon

Re: Endorsements one by one [was Re: Endorsing David Neary]

    Are you going to keep doing this over and over until you have endorsed
    seven candidates?

It is possible, but unlikely.  I don't think I will want to endorse 7
different candidates.

    Could you please come up with one email listing the candidates you endorse
    and wish to promote rather than doing it seperately for each candidate as
    others have done.

I wish I could have made all the decisions before the start of voting,
but it didn't turn out that way.  Since voting has already begun, I
don't want to delay an endorsement while waiting to decide about other
people.  I don't know how long those conversations will take.
Daniel Veillard | 1 Dec 12:50 2005
Picon

Re: The changing of the board

On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 11:34:54AM -0500, Jonathan Blandford wrote:
> 
> > If elected, I'll be much more comfortable if there's a transition
> > period. It doesn't need to be very long, but I think it would be useful
> > to learn how the board is working from the inside before doing some
> > stupid^Wgreat things (at least for me) :-)
> 
> Traditionally[1], the board has one meeting with both the old and the
> new members.  There have been enough overlap in the members that this
> has been sufficient to get things started.

  I confirm, historically this has worked well enough.

Daniel

--

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat http://redhat.com/
veillard <at> redhat.com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
Baris Cicek | 1 Dec 12:57 2005
Picon

Re: Endorsements one by one [was Re: Endorsing David Neary]

sure if it's okay to provide this information (although I don't see any
> reason why it wouldn't be okay). Is there any objection to this idea?
> 

Well that's totally against the spirit of voting. Current counts may
change people's idea and might get them affected and they would vote
strategically instead of on their own free will. 

Actually what Stallman and others did during voting is campaigning and
this should have ended before voting get started. It's very likely that
some people on the middle of their voting see these endorsements and
vote them to fill their seven people limit (because of their respect to
Stallman or other endorser, not because they personally want the one in
board) even though they do not know who those guys are.

I wish Board would change the election rules for later elections. 

Sending endorsement mails to list is nothing that I'm against to, I can
even encourage people to send these kind of mails because they are
helpful. It's just timing problem. These should end with the starting of
voting period.

On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 06:52 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
> On mer, 2005-11-30 at 18:12 +0000, Alan Horkan wrote:
> > To change the subject slightly I'd be interested to know how good the
> > turnout has been so far if it is not too much trouble for the Electoral
> > committee to provide that kind of preliminary information.
> 
> (I'm not wearing my membership committee hat and when I say "committee",
> please consider I'm not the one doing the work)
(Continue reading)

Quim Gil | 1 Dec 13:03 2005

Re: Endorsements one by one [was Re: Endorsing David Neary]


En/na Baris Cicek ha escrit:
> sure if it's okay to provide this information (although I don't see any
> 
>>reason why it wouldn't be okay). Is there any objection to this idea?

I'm for showing the participation (% of members that have already voted)
but not provisional results of the election.

Showing the percentage of participation at any time may help increasing
the percentage of vote at the end of the election, and it's a harmless
data by itself.

--

-- 
Quim Gil - http://desdeamericaconamor.org
_______________________________________________
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Davyd Madeley | 1 Dec 13:06 2005
Picon

Re: Endorsements one by one [was Re: Endorsing David Neary]

On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 13:03 +0100, Quim Gil wrote:

> I'm for showing the participation (% of members that have already voted)
> but not provisional results of the election.

This might actually be really cool as a thermometer style graph on the
webpage.

--d

--

-- 
Davyd Madeley

http://www.davyd.id.au/
08B0 341A 0B9B 08BB 2118  C060 2EDD BB4F 5191 6CDA
Vincent Untz | 1 Dec 13:16 2005
Picon

Re: Endorsements one by one [was Re: Endorsing David Neary]

On Thu, December 1, 2005 13:03, Quim Gil wrote:
>
> En/na Baris Cicek ha escrit:
>> sure if it's okay to provide this information (although I don't see any
>>
>>>reason why it wouldn't be okay). Is there any objection to this idea?
>
> I'm for showing the participation (% of members that have already voted)
> but not provisional results of the election.
>
> Showing the percentage of participation at any time may help increasing
> the percentage of vote at the end of the election, and it's a harmless
> data by itself.

I was of course not saying that we can show the current results, but
the participation rate. I think this is what Alan suggested too (or did
I read his mail too quickly?).

FWIW, I think this is a good idea (for the reason outlined by Quim).

Vincent

--

-- 
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
Vincent Untz | 1 Dec 13:22 2005
Picon

Re: Endorsements one by one [was Re: Endorsing David Neary]

Hi Baris,

On Thu, December 1, 2005 12:57, Baris Cicek wrote:
> Actually what Stallman and others did during voting is campaigning and
> this should have ended before voting get started. It's very likely that
> some people on the middle of their voting see these endorsements and
> vote them to fill their seven people limit (because of their respect to
> Stallman or other endorser, not because they personally want the one in
> board) even though they do not know who those guys are.
>
> I wish Board would change the election rules for later elections.

If you think this should be changed, it might be a good thing to add
an item to the committee todo list:
   http://live.gnome.org/MembershipCommittee/ToDo

I don't see what we can do to avoid such things, though.

Vincent

--

-- 
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
Baris Cicek | 1 Dec 13:42 2005
Picon

Re: Endorsements one by one [was Re: Endorsing David Neary]

On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 13:16 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
> On Thu, December 1, 2005 13:03, Quim Gil wrote:
> >
> > En/na Baris Cicek ha escrit:
> >> sure if it's okay to provide this information (although I don't see any
> >>
> >>>reason why it wouldn't be okay). Is there any objection to this idea?
> >
> > I'm for showing the participation (% of members that have already voted)
> > but not provisional results of the election.
> >
> > Showing the percentage of participation at any time may help increasing
> > the percentage of vote at the end of the election, and it's a harmless
> > data by itself.
Indeed I don't think in any case that might increase the participation.
By the way, if someone is voting just because participation is low at
the time being it's better for him/her not to vote at all. People should
vote because they care, because they know the role and importance of the
Board and because they want to elect the best Board member they would
like to see on Board for a year. 

> 
> I was of course not saying that we can show the current results, but
> the participation rate. I think this is what Alan suggested too (or did
> I read his mail too quickly?).

If what Alan suggested is the participation rate, then I don't see any
problem with that. I don't think of any reason why it would be really
beneficial to know that data during voting period anyways. However, I
don't think it's a problem and would affect the election though. This
(Continue reading)

Alan Horkan | 1 Dec 14:17 2005
Picon
Picon

Re: Endorsements one by one [was Re: Endorsing David Neary]


On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Quim Gil wrote:

[...]

> I'm for showing the participation (% of members that have already voted)
> but not provisional results of the election.

I was only hoping for participation (like a very simple exit poll) which
might encourage more people to vote.

> Showing the percentage of participation at any time may help increasing
> the percentage of vote at the end of the election, and it's a harmless
> data by itself.

Thanks

Alan

Gmane