From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1D5E1580B9 for ; Sat, 21 Aug 2021 07:07:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E494CE0875; Sat, 21 Aug 2021 07:07:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B81FFE0875 for ; Sat, 21 Aug 2021 07:07:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from grubbs.orbis-terrarum.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6F7B34092D for ; Sat, 21 Aug 2021 07:07:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 16698 invoked by uid 10000); 21 Aug 2021 07:07:09 -0000 Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2021 07:07:09 +0000 From: "Robin H. Johnson" Cc: gentoo-nfp Subject: Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: Gentoo Foundation Trustees 202106 Election Results Message-ID: References: <400a6b8c-397b-c8e8-e06a-f1a7b67543f4@gentoo.org> <4d3fe137-5deb-66e5-67a2-8f2c92fb124b@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-nfp@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5Dv4gCtSGkQ+Zl9C" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Archives-Salt: 867c1b08-c6a9-4f7c-8add-520eb3173442 X-Archives-Hash: e8cb610d077efeeee1f8d4585049eb33 --5Dv4gCtSGkQ+Zl9C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 05:19:15PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > this is actually the first time anybody has even had the chance to > vote for the reopen option. Why do you think this is the first time somebody had an option to use the reopen option? The last 3 Trustees elections had _reopen_nominations as an option. https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/elections.git/tree/completed/trustees-201807= /ballot-trustees-201807 https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/elections.git/tree/completed/trustees-201906= /ballot-trustees-201906 https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/elections.git/tree/completed/trustees-202006= /ballot-trustees-202006 Council has used it since the council2008b election. > IMO the simplest option is to just leave alicef in her position at > least in the interim, inquire via the lists if anybody else wants to > run, and then if there are other candidates hold another election. If > nobody else has an interest the Trustees could just appoint alicef (or > anybody else) to the slot. This is similar to my suggestion: if nobody else is nominated, alicef gets the seat anyway. > Honestly, this situation is making me question the point of even > having the reopen option. If we were going to just operate with an > unoccupied chair that might be one thing, but it seems like the time > for others to step up to run is during the initial election. Having > the voters say we don't like the options doesn't really help, and it > just creates a somewhat adversarial situation. I'm not sure that > operating with less than a full set of board members is good idea - > maybe if we had a dozen of them it wouldn't be a big deal to have > empty seats, but with only 5 the org really opens itself up to serious > problems if it has one or more positions vacant, like 1-2 people being > able to take unilateral action, bus factor, and so on. The reopen option makes a lot of sense if there are many nominees, and elected representatives potentially retire between elections: the next representative down the list, as long as they are above the reopen option are eligible to become elected representatives. Maybe adjust the voting to say: If there are strictly more candidates than open seats, then the reopen option should be present? At that point, we could end up w/ a 3+ way tie for the last seat sometimes? --=20 Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Dev, Infra Lead, Foundation Treasurer E-Mail : robbat2@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85 GnuPG FP : 7D0B3CEB E9B85B1F 825BCECF EE05E6F6 A48F6136 --5Dv4gCtSGkQ+Zl9C Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 Comment: Robbat2 @ Orbis-Terrarum Networks - The text below is a digital signature. If it doesn't make any sense to you, ignore it. iQKTBAABCgB9FiEEveu2pS8Vb98xaNkRGTlfI8WIJsQFAmEgphtfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEJE RUJCNkE1MkYxNTZGREYzMTY4RDkxMTE5Mzk1RjIzQzU4ODI2QzQACgkQGTlfI8WI JsQKZA//cS9dUmmx82qSod8KO5+gclSGCkr6WkR4Cz1cVJjCh+ulnz1kUwk7wY+0 c3MVpUeiMvs7vuU5Hd9eifSC4Lphn6lDWhMtVW6q/n81GDImNnXBmdtqOp+gR4Kq v7h1dRo4OkUXYaPppUwuAoQKHztF9UZ9og7a8kJkwnSMjYAOKWa3l8C7MhilF+Yv dKsG5/Wsp6GnciuGOH23vsd9w/tNMzuX02OMg7X9SiIj415fM6G9akDn6u8F65G6 Y9SubNbyL8MAj8bgsNItOZucoNh6DvzeOM+9swGQWv29vfA1t/wGf8WBcWyqItEQ s2HQVQefmp8bYi8jjY2acQnzLGppQnDIU1VLR1U4Avjl2a050VVrSJLoc0xB1oQd zcEEbacWs07gMAw7BHZyqxap4LceJOjQLRU/+24QfhfChOpMF9sZCUC+1aVKUcfO Vm5kmiSj/+85PZwnN5mTO8VrcQnRjvz/onjeQ3am7pLIeBo+2Ccl8BAsFPs7lSOn nhT5kxNKwMRR69ufHz49XL5mxtxb6AX+iKghfktDPZETNk5IsXo1cx+d4V83I8gM YeibnEYjXnxyc1Qb7RSnTX/K7hrKaPlF6aOMVAIDlUqY3QJtcKaVuX0IBVLyG5KG tKBgST6G/MrxLsEFyZbg/rdOc2jFoW3ShfBB1Ek0uY+FHzDNo6E= =f0TZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --5Dv4gCtSGkQ+Zl9C--