> I pretty much feel the same way. I understand why it was done, I used to be > an avid supporter of reducing the number of seats on the board, but in the > end, I don't think it was done for the right reasons, nor were alternatives > properly canvassed.
I couldn't agree more. I got the clear impression that some board members didn't like being there. I got the clear impression that the board's decision making abilities were somehow less-than-effective. What I didn't get was how removing people from the board would positively effect changes, or if there were perhaps other unexplored options. But you bring up a good point - this referendum was advisory only, which is a point that I (and perhaps others) overlooked. That leaves me with a few questions and only 7-8 days until the election is scheduled (if http://foundation.gnome.org/elections/2005/rules.html is up-to-date). Candidacies must be announced prior to November 14, 2005 or thereabouts (which has already passed). Currently, I count 8 nominees (Federico, Christian, Jonathan, Bastien, Vincent, Behdad, Quim, David). Will this be 8 nominees to fill 11 seats? Or 12 seats (11 board seats + Tim's vacancy)? Or 7 seats? Or 8 seats? Must the board decide this before the election? What happens if the board doesn't reduce the number of seats and there are only 8 warm bodies to fill them? Or if there are only 7-8 seats, in which case all nominees are guaranteed a seat (they're all qualified guys, but their being shoe-ins is a little depressing). Or will the board uses the small number of nominees to shape their decision on the number of seats? I guess my question is: is it even vaguely ok to have the nomination period closed before we're certain of how many board members we'll have next year? Puzzled, Dom _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
