|
Grex > Coop11 > #38: Nominations for the Board of Directors | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 126 responses total. |
rcurl
|
|
response 84 of 126:
| 
Dec 1 17:15 UTC 1998 |
Does it depend upon *what* you know about them?
|
jep
|
|
response 85 of 126:
|
Dec 1 17:59 UTC 1998 |
I thought all of the candidates in this election were excellent.
I haven't seen much in their campaign statements to distinguish them,
one from another. They're all in favor of Grex, and none disagree with
the basic concept of what Grex should be about. None of them have said
anything I disagree with. If I knew all of the candidates equally well,
and my impressions of all of them turned out to be correct, I think it
would have been difficult for me to choose any 3 over the rest.
Naturally if I knew something about a candidate that I thought made him
a bad choice, it would affect my decision-making process. Am I just too
obtuse today to recognize a joke?
|
janc
|
|
response 86 of 126:
|
Dec 1 21:02 UTC 1998 |
Hmmm...The "campaign statement" I had up was one that rolled over from
the last election two years ago. Still mostly applied, but I've written
a new one now.
It's a hard list to choose from. Maybe I'll skip voting for myself so I
can vote for more of the other good candidates. I've met them all, so
that doesn't help at all. (No wonder Valerie always gets elected -
she's met everyone).
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 87 of 126:
|
Dec 2 03:49 UTC 1998 |
Just to make sure: I'm _not_ able to run in this election. I don't think I
accepted the nomination, but I did get email from Remmers. Unfortunately,
chaos is happening, and my current commitments are all that I can handle.
I'm appreciative of the nomination, but......
<sigh>
|
remmers
|
|
response 88 of 126:
|
Dec 2 11:35 UTC 1998 |
I interpreted your earlier remarks as a conditional acceptance, and your
name is on the ballot. I'll remove your name and notify members via
email of the ballot change. They can then revote if they wish. (Yet
another benefit of allowing folks to vote more than once!)
|
remmers
|
|
response 89 of 126:
|
Dec 2 16:00 UTC 1998 |
Colleen's name has been removed. I've sent mail to everyone who voted
so far notifying them of the change. (The mail was sent via a script
that I cobbled together rather quickly. Hopefully it worked.)
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 90 of 126:
|
Dec 2 16:48 UTC 1998 |
Thanks.
|
valerie
|
|
response 91 of 126:
|
Dec 2 17:50 UTC 1998 |
This response has been erased.
|
steve
|
|
response 92 of 126:
|
Dec 2 19:12 UTC 1998 |
If I had a problem with it, I'd squawk.
I suppose, when that magical day occurs that we have so many staff
that they wander the hallways of Grex looking for something to do, that
we could have an election official.
But I trust John implicitly. I trust all the rootfolk here and I
think that others do, too.
|
dpc
|
|
response 93 of 126:
|
Dec 2 19:25 UTC 1998 |
I have no problem with John running the election at all.
|
krj
|
|
response 94 of 126:
|
Dec 2 22:06 UTC 1998 |
I have a question or two which I might like to put forth to the
candidates. Should I just start a new coop item for each question?
It would seem redundant for me to pose the question in each candidate's
campaign item, assuming they have one.
Or should there just be one free-for-all ask-the-candidates item?
I'm seeking a little guidance on structure here.
|
steve
|
|
response 95 of 126:
|
Dec 2 22:41 UTC 1998 |
I'd start an item in coop and asked that it be linked to agora, maybe.
|
remmers
|
|
response 96 of 126:
|
Dec 3 00:18 UTC 1998 |
Re #91-93: The same thought (appropriateness of me being election czar
and simultaneously a candidate, at least from the point of view of
appearance) occurred to me. It's happened twice before though, and
nobody voiced any concerns, so I let it ride. From a practical point of
view, in terms of the security of the balloting, I don't think it makes
any difference who the election official is. The votes are stored
online, source to vote program is accessible to any staff member, and
any vote-tampering that I could do could also be done by any root. So it
all boils down to trusting the roots, regardless of who's officially "in
charge".
If there's a feeling of discomfort with the arrangment, though, I'd be
quite willing to step aside and let some other staffer take over.
Re resp:94 - I like the idea of one free-for-all ask-the-candidates
item. Whenever there's an election, I always like to put a pointer to a
discussion item on the ballot and in the motd, and that would give me an
item to point to. (I could put pointers to all candidates' statement
items, but that would bloat things a bit, I think.)
|
remmers
|
|
response 97 of 126:
|
Dec 3 11:46 UTC 1998 |
Re resp:91 first paragraph: For obscure technical reasons, I think the
mail I sent out went to the address popcorn@cyberspace.org. Is that mail
shunted to the right place?
|
steve
|
|
response 98 of 126:
|
Dec 3 12:15 UTC 1998 |
Yes--it gets forwarded to her.
|
janc
|
|
response 99 of 126:
|
Dec 3 17:35 UTC 1998 |
I don't think I got email notification either (I had voted for Colleen),
but I'm not 100% sure that it isn't lurking in the depths of my staff
mail box - shouldn't go there though.
|
remmers
|
|
response 100 of 126:
|
Dec 3 18:13 UTC 1998 |
Yes, if you go there, you might never get out.
Hm, I voted and so got a copy of my own message. I wonder if the problem
was that my script invoked sendmail directly in a tight loop. Does
sendmail have some anti-spam measure in place that rejects rapid-fire
mail from the same address to a bunch of different users?
|
steve
|
|
response 101 of 126:
|
Dec 3 19:41 UTC 1998 |
Excellent question. Marcus will know. ;-)
|
remmers
|
|
response 102 of 126:
|
Dec 3 20:44 UTC 1998 |
In any case, I think I'll resend the mail by a different method, as my
first method seems not to have worked.
|
scg
|
|
response 103 of 126:
|
Dec 3 23:59 UTC 1998 |
I didn't get the mail either, and I had already voted.
|
jep
|
|
response 104 of 126:
|
Dec 4 21:45 UTC 1998 |
I didn't get it, either, and I had voted.
|
mdw
|
|
response 105 of 126:
|
Dec 4 23:12 UTC 1998 |
Sendmail doesn't (yet) have anything to look for people sending lots of
mail from grex. It's something we'll probably need to add someday.
|
davel
|
|
response 106 of 126:
|
Dec 5 13:04 UTC 1998 |
I also had voted when Colleen was a candidate, & didn't get John's mail.
I have no problem with John's running the election. If we're going to trust
people with root, they have the ability to diddle the voting whoever actually
runs the election. My experience also indicates that John seeks out someone
else to verify the actual count.
|
remmers
|
|
response 107 of 126:
|
Dec 5 14:24 UTC 1998 |
Yes, I've done that in several elections, and certainly every one
in which I've been a candidate. I think it should be done. Dave,
are you willing to be vote count verifier, and are other folks
comfortable with Dave doing that. If so, I'll give you the
necessary access permissions.
|
remmers
|
|
response 108 of 126:
|
Dec 5 14:30 UTC 1998 |
(And re possible vote-diddling: There are safeguards in the program
that would detect various kinds of vote tampering. I'd prefer not
to say what they are. However, they're not 100% foolproof, and a
knowledgeable programmer with root access and access to the source
code could probably figure out ways around them. And as previously
pointed out, Grex staff has access to the source.)
|