MJ Ray <[email protected]> writes: > How much time do you think voters should spend reading these discussions?
Enough time to make an informed decision - or throw a dice, whichever they prefer. Noone's required to read all (or any) of -vote@, it is entirely up to them how much time they want to spend on it. Myself, I enjoyed reading -vote@ in the past (and still continue to do so, albeit answering everything is much harder than reading only, especially when there's overlap and noise involved too). > With the benefit of some hindsight, do you feel that you are being > concise enough to achieve that time? Yes and no. Yes, because people have the ability to stop reading me anytime they want. No, becuase my intention is not to shorten the campaign period. I could do that, by saying "I suck, vote for NoTA over me!", or just link my platform to every second question, but that would not really do me anything good (and it would be quite dishonest too). > Would you change anything about the DPL or GR processes to help achieve that > time? Once thing that I thought about was a pre-arranged questionnaire for the candidates: collected the week after platforms are published, before the campaign period, then posted, with the candidates having a week to answer. Once answered, further questions are collected and organised again, and posted in a followup questionnare - you get the idea. This would eliminate overlapping questions, and would make it easier for the candidates to answer. On the other hand, it would be a lot of work, would be terribly boring, and I'd hate it. So lets not do that. I do like the element of surprise in our current campaign process. -- |8] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
