|
Grex > Coop12 > #49: Nominations for the Board of Directors | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 332 responses total. |
remmers
|
|
response 138 of 332:
| 
Nov 28 01:23 UTC 2001 |
I'll put up an updated list tomorrow, when I have time to go
through the item. (Unless somebody beats me to it.)
|
richard
|
|
response 139 of 332:
|
Nov 28 05:26 UTC 2001 |
maybe it should be said that those who have been nominated and have
not either accepted or declined, are presumed to have accepted and
after the deadline, are automatically put on the ballot. this would
presumably eliminate the problem of procrastination. I think
if one is nominated, one has an obligation to make a decision based
solely on whether they want to run or not, and should not wait around
to see who else is nominated or accepts nominations. it is not
fair to those who are eager candidates for others to simply not
answer or drag things out and make people believe they might run
when it fact they won't
|
richard
|
|
response 140 of 332:
|
Nov 28 05:31 UTC 2001 |
or maybe a simpler way to do it, is that whoever is placed in nomination,
is notified via email of their nomination, and has ten days toe ither
accept or decline. no more dragging this out. no more dragging things
out and not making decision, thereby influencing other people to make
or not make decisions. I think the grex electorate is entitled to swift
and clear decisions on who wants, really wants, to run and who doesnt.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 141 of 332:
|
Nov 28 05:33 UTC 2001 |
Since acceptances and declinations can be withdrawn (that is, nominees can
change their minds) at any time up to the beginning of balloting, assumptions
of their intentions are invalid.
We can afford patience.
|
janc
|
|
response 142 of 332:
|
Nov 28 05:39 UTC 2001 |
I disagree. Making a decision on whether or not to run based on who else is
on the ballot sounds perfectly sensible to me. I care a lot about Grex, and
if there were any kind of real shortage of good candidates willing to serve
on the board, I'd be there in a minute. But board meetings are fairly hard
for me to get to on a reliable basis these days, and there are lots of other
ways I can contribute to Grex. So much as I enjoy the ego-boo of being on
board, I'm not going to do it unless either there are not enough other good
candidates, or if there is some issue that I want to get involved in for which
being a board member is useful (getting 501c3 done was one such issue a few
years back).
|
janc
|
|
response 143 of 332:
|
Nov 28 05:40 UTC 2001 |
Joe slipped in. I disagree with Richard, not Joe.
|
janc
|
|
response 144 of 332:
|
Nov 28 05:44 UTC 2001 |
I think it is:
ACCEPTED
jp2
bhelliom
mary
mdw
orinoco
kaplan
flem
other
NOMINATED
cmcgee
krj
danr
rcurl
tpryan
lelande
pthomas
DECLINED
i
dpc
russ
eeyore
janc
davel
scott
arabella
jep
gelinas
|
gelinas
|
|
response 145 of 332:
|
Nov 28 05:51 UTC 2001 |
(#124 was an acceptance. E'en if pessimistic. ;)
|
janc
|
|
response 146 of 332:
|
Nov 28 06:17 UTC 2001 |
Oops. I though someone accepted from my last round of nominations, but missed
it on skiming. Sorry
ACCEPTED
jp2
bhelliom
mary
mdw
orinoco
kaplan
flem
other
gelinas
NOMINATED
cmcgee
krj
danr
rcurl
tpryan
lelande
pthomas
DECLINED
i
dpc
russ
eeyore
janc
davel
scott
arabella
jep
Nine candidates for 4 seats is a surfeit of riches, and will be a darned hard
choice.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 147 of 332:
|
Nov 28 06:19 UTC 2001 |
No apology necessary, Jan. :)
|
remmers
|
|
response 148 of 332:
|
Nov 28 13:11 UTC 2001 |
Re #146: Thanks for compiling the list, Jan. Indeed, there will
be hard choices.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 149 of 332:
|
Nov 28 13:14 UTC 2001 |
Thanks, Jan
I am going to decline, again. To add another BoD to my schedule would
mean resigning from another one. Like Jan, I would gladly serve if I
thought it was critical to Grex's survival, or if at some future time I'm
no longer on three other boards.
For this election however, I'm sure we can elect four really good people
from the selection above.
|
remmers
|
|
response 150 of 332:
|
Nov 28 14:03 UTC 2001 |
Oldtimers probably know this but newcomers might not: The vote
program will display a "statement" by each candidate who wishes
to have one. It's limited in size to a standard 24x80 terminal
screen. To make one, create a world-readable file with a
certain name in your home directory; the vote program will
find it and display it on request. I'll email detailed
instructions to all candidates in a day or two.
Voting starts on Saturday, December 1. Any nominee who hasn't
yet accepted and who wishes to appear on the ballot must post an
acceptance no later than Friday, November 30.
|
jp2
|
|
response 151 of 332:
|
Nov 28 15:06 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
other
|
|
response 152 of 332:
|
Nov 28 16:04 UTC 2001 |
I think candidates ought to consider making the statements
web-accessible. I've symlinked mine to ~other/statement.
|
aruba
|
|
response 153 of 332:
|
Nov 28 16:36 UTC 2001 |
A note to candidates: those who don't put their statements up until late in
the voting period often suffer at the polls.
|
jep
|
|
response 154 of 332:
|
Nov 28 17:21 UTC 2001 |
If I were a voter, I would not want to see any names on the ballot who
do not want to serve on the Board if they win.
If I were an eligible potential candidate, and found my name on the
ballot when I had not consented to have it there, I would be terribly
annoyed. If I found I'd actually been elected without consenting to
run, I'd be annoyed and very embarrassed.
Under no circumstances do I, in my opinion, have any obligation to Grex
to announce what I am not doing. On the other hand, if I wanted to
run, I would have an obligation to do what's necessary to have my name
placed on the ballot.
So, for these reasons, I think Grex should stick with it's current
system and not place anyone on the ballot without their consent.
|
jep
|
|
response 155 of 332:
|
Nov 28 17:24 UTC 2001 |
I see an excellent pool of candidates for this election. While I'm not
an eligible voter, I do appreciate the willingness to contribute on the
part of all of those who are running. Thank you and good luck to each
of you.
|
jp2
|
|
response 156 of 332:
|
Nov 28 17:25 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
krj
|
|
response 157 of 332:
|
Nov 28 18:27 UTC 2001 |
I will stop dithering and decline my nomination.
|
flem
|
|
response 158 of 332:
|
Nov 28 18:34 UTC 2001 |
I'd forgotten about the statements. I bet the one from 2 years ago is still
cluttering my ~.
|
remmers
|
|
response 159 of 332:
|
Nov 28 19:02 UTC 2001 |
Re #152: Candidates' statements are web-accessible from the web
version of the vote program.
I'll review this item to make sure the acceptance list is accurate,
before I open the polls. I agree that a self-nomination counts as
an acceptance.
Bear in mind that to appear on the ballot, you *must* be a paid-up
member by the time the polls open.
|
janc
|
|
response 160 of 332:
|
Nov 28 20:12 UTC 2001 |
I can't find any nomination of pthomas in this item. All I see is jp2's
seconding of pthomas's nomination. I included pthomas on the nominated list
because a second of a non-existant nomination is as good as a nomination, if
you ask me, but there is only one response from pthomas in this item (response
114 where he accuses Jamie of being an ACLU member) and it doesn't sound like
a self-nomination to me.
|
jp2
|
|
response 161 of 332:
|
Nov 28 21:47 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
pthomas
|
|
response 162 of 332:
|
Nov 29 00:05 UTC 2001 |
I accept my nomination.
|