|
Grex > Coop10 > #49: Nominations for the Board of Directors | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 88 responses total. |
davel
|
|
response 25 of 88:
| 
Nov 8 03:14 UTC 1997 |
Welcome back to coop, richard. <SIGH>
|
orinoco
|
|
response 26 of 88:
|
Nov 8 04:04 UTC 1997 |
I dunno, I think I'd be amused to see danr in a bikini.. :)
|
rcurl
|
|
response 27 of 88:
|
Nov 8 04:57 UTC 1997 |
I don't think I would like that atoll.
|
robh
|
|
response 28 of 88:
|
Nov 8 06:51 UTC 1997 |
Bimini Crickets, can't we stop with the puns?
|
remmers
|
|
response 29 of 88:
|
Nov 8 11:15 UTC 1997 |
Next year, two current board members will have reached the
two-term limit that Jan refers to in resp:21. So if there isn't
"new blood" this time around, there will be a year from now.
Personally, I think it's fine for people who have served only
one term (or a fraction of a term, in dang's case) to run again,
and I hope none of the nominees feel pressured to drop out.
|
richard
|
|
response 30 of 88:
|
Nov 8 15:34 UTC 1997 |
okay points taken, but these *are* popularity contests. It is likely
that there are no significant differences in views on issues among the
candidates out there. There are no issues on the table political enough
to provoke such differences. In fact the last time I recall anyone being
on the board being strongly opposed to board or membership sentiment,
was robh on the anonymous reading issue. And he resigned rather than
disrupt the harmony of the board.
Accepting this, how do you decide whether to vote for Misti, Scott, or
LLanarth, when you can only vote for two of the three? Popularity. Who
do you know better. Members are going to be more familiar with the names
of those who have served.
I submit that the overwhelming majority of the voting membership will vote
based on popularity and familiarity, and that perhaps the bylaws should
be changed so noone can serve consecutive terms. People can still run
again in this scenario, just not in the immediate election after their
term ends. This would be fair and would allow more people the opportunity
to serve on theboard.
|
orinoco
|
|
response 31 of 88:
|
Nov 8 16:58 UTC 1997 |
Well, that's not _necessarily_ a bad thing. I'd certainly feel more
comfortable, were I a voting member, voting for someone I was familiar with
and knew to be a decent person. On the other hand, if my familiarity with
one of them came from being repeatedly flamed, I would vote for someone else.
|
robh
|
|
response 32 of 88:
|
Nov 8 16:59 UTC 1997 |
Just a little correction to Richard's, um, *interesting* view
of Grex history: I did NOT resign to avoid "disrupting the harmony
of the Board", I resigned because the membership clearly showed
that their views and mine didn't match any longer. If I thought
the members had wanted one thiong and the Board had wanted another,
I would have stayed and fought on their (the members') behalf.
Remember, the main function of the Board (IMHO) is to serve the membership.
|
remmers
|
|
response 33 of 88:
|
Nov 8 17:43 UTC 1997 |
Re #30: This kind of thing has been pointed out before, but
there's a formal procedure for amending the bylaws. You can set
the wheels in motion for a change by convincing a member to
enter an item with a formal proposal, or by becoming a member
and entering one yourself. To take effect, 3/4 of those voting
must vote in favor of the amendment.
Are there any more candidates? Nominations are open through
November 15.
|
richard
|
|
response 34 of 88:
|
Nov 8 21:14 UTC 1997 |
I nominate robh...I need someone on the board who I can antagonize.
you made your point by resigning, that issue's done with, so run again!
|
robh
|
|
response 35 of 88:
|
Nov 8 21:26 UTC 1997 |
Your honesty is refreshing. >8)
I must decline your nomination, as I have already declined someone
else's offer to nominate.
|
dpc
|
|
response 36 of 88:
|
Nov 8 21:40 UTC 1997 |
I'm with mdw on the importance of Grex elections. Once the nomination
process is done, I've got a bunch of questions for the candidates.
Such as: Are you willing to set deadlines for projects to be completed?
|
jared
|
|
response 37 of 88:
|
Nov 8 21:48 UTC 1997 |
I'll run to see if I'm popular enough to be elected
|
valerie
|
|
response 38 of 88:
|
Nov 9 05:33 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|
dang
|
|
response 39 of 88:
|
Nov 10 00:05 UTC 1997 |
Dave: I'm with you and mdw too. I've got a whole bunch of answers. :)
I guess it's time to heat up the o'l vim and get to work on my statement.
Hey John, what are the size restrictions on the statments again?
|
remmers
|
|
response 40 of 88:
|
Nov 10 09:17 UTC 1997 |
As I recall, 23 lines, max of 79 characters per line.
|
mziemba
|
|
response 41 of 88:
|
Nov 10 10:52 UTC 1997 |
Although I nominated myself, I guess I haven't officially accepted my own
nomination. So, I'm officially accepting...
As a new candidate, I don't object to running against a significant amount
of current board members. While I obviosuly don't have previous experience
on Grex's board, I am active in other aspects of Grex. I think this is
something that would make me at least more than unfamiliar. A forum for
discussion with the candidates before the election would familiarize any
interested Grexers with our viewpoints and character. I assume there will
be an opportunity for this, if only as a co-op conference item.
I do, however, appreciate the enthusiasm demonstrated for new candidates!
|
davel
|
|
response 42 of 88:
|
Nov 10 15:30 UTC 1997 |
As Dan & John were just discussing, there's an official setup for candidates'
statements. In the past, sometimes someone (ajax, at least) has come up with
a questionnaire & posted the results. But feel free to start a coop item
yourself.
|
mziemba
|
|
response 43 of 88:
|
Nov 10 18:34 UTC 1997 |
What would that official set-up be?
|
dang
|
|
response 44 of 88:
|
Nov 11 03:15 UTC 1997 |
Candidates create a publically readable text file in their home directories
called "statement" (without the quotes, of course) which contains at most 23
lines with at most 79 characters on each line. The file can contain whatever
you want. When someone votes, they have to option to view a candidate's
statement, if he or she has one. Thus, even people who don't follow co-op
have an opertunity to see at least something about at least some of the
candidates.
|
tsty
|
|
response 45 of 88:
|
Nov 11 03:40 UTC 1997 |
for others as well, it's quite restricting that a guaranteed
pre-payment of 1 full years membership would not suffice for
qualification to be nominated and run for a board seat.
might even generate a few memberships - pending the outcome
of the election, that is.
|
lilmo
|
|
response 46 of 88:
|
Nov 11 03:56 UTC 1997 |
Was the question of whether non-members could nominate members for board seats
ever settled? This came up three years ago, I believe, and I haven't been
around much since...
|
mziemba
|
|
response 47 of 88:
|
Nov 11 06:47 UTC 1997 |
Ah...thanks, Dan!
|
remmers
|
|
response 48 of 88:
|
Nov 11 10:45 UTC 1997 |
Re #46: Well, self-nomination is allowed, and a person who's
been nominated has to say whether they accept the nomination or
not, which is tantamount to self-nomination. So by that logic,
it doesn't matter who first nominates someone. At least, that's
how I remember that the issue was settled.
(By the way: Hi, lilmo. Haven't seen you around for a loooooong
time.)
|
valerie
|
|
response 49 of 88:
|
Nov 13 19:05 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|