response 150 of 167:

Dec 5 23:45 UTC 1999

In case the people who run the voting program don't already have too much
on their hands: it would have been nice if when you pick the `vote' option,
you saw usersnames as well as legal names; I found that I recognized some
of the usernames for which I did not happen to know the corresponding legal
name.

response 152 of 167:

Dec 6 04:53 UTC 1999

Actually, I was home busy being sick, but my plan is to enter a
statement tonight.

response 154 of 167:

Dec 6 06:47 UTC 1999

The vote program seems to have truncated your statement, Marcus: it
ends, "The two things I think I can bring the grex board are technical
expertise and".

response 156 of 167:

Dec 6 15:14 UTC 1999

Technical expertise is not all that bad a thing to offer.
I am also more likely to vote for candidates who have actually showed up at
board meetings (other has attended on most of the occasions when I did) or
the recent planning meeting (where I met flem).  Have the other candidates
been to any meetings that I was not at?

response 158 of 167:

Dec 7 04:51 UTC 1999

I have, I believe, attended exactly one board meeting.  I think, but am 
not sure, that it was the meeting immediately following the actual 
hearings for the ACLU lawsuit.  I also attended the FOG meeting 
recently, about which there *still* has been very little discussion 
online.  :)  I've also been to lots of various potlucks and picnics and 
GNO's and pubbings and such over the years, FWIW.

I remember reading, several years ago, something that I believe Valerie 
said.  It went something like "Grex is the only organization I know of 
that consistently has more good candidates than positions available." 
Part of the reason why I haven't felt the need to be more active in the 
official doings of Grex is as Marcus said:  for as long as I have known 
it, Grex has always had excellent leadership.  I hope that I'll be able 
to do something to help keep that streak alive.  :)

response 160 of 167:

Dec 10 08:34 UTC 1999

Okay, to add  my two cents: I have been to a grand total of two meetings. Maybe
three. The last one I was at was about a year ago. But at least I know the
general format to follow: 1) Raise a point 2) Steve Gibbard makes bad jokes 3)
Argue about technical irrelevancies

of course, since steve isn't actually board-member-material nowadays, that
pretty much shows exactly how long it  has been since I showed up to any
meetings =-)

(No hard feelings, steve!)

As I said in my statement, this is not exactly a position I want (but then, 
does anyone really want to serve on a board or go to meetings?
if so, you are a danger to the human race, and you must be eradicated --
even if I must admit that all the grex board meetings were actually
rather interesting, and even somewhat humourous at times).

I had best shut up now, as everyone who has seen _Bullworth_ knows
making campaign statements wduring a state of sleep deprivation is
not a good idea.

response 162 of 167:

Dec 13 13:20 UTC 1999

"A petty consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."  -Emerson

(No offense  ;-)

Actually, you're quite right, and it occurred to me too.  It's not
something that people of intelligence should have a problem coping with,
but perhaps before the next election I'll change the interface before
the next election.

Re resp:150 - I agree that it would be somewhat nicer to have login id's
displayed when you're casting a ballot.  It's not too much of a problem
that they aren't, because people using the vote program have presumably
just looked at the list of candidates, which *does* include login id's
along with the names.  You're the first person to raise this point
publicly in the seven years the vote program has been used, which is
probably why I've never done anything about it.  Nonetheless, perhaps
I'll change it for next time.

response 164 of 167:

Dec 14 03:06 UTC 1999

Re #162: Why should I have to look at the list of canidates if I can be lazy
and expect the `vote' option to remind me who I can vote for?

(I think I did in fact work around this by displaying the list of canidates
and then immediately voting.)

response 166 of 167:

Dec 17 22:57 UTC 1999

Re #163:  That's what I heard, as well