Hello, On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 7:10 PM, meg ford <meg...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Alexandre Franke <afra...@gnome.org> > wrote: >> >> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Michael Catanzaro >> <mike.catanz...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Here's another question: what do the candidates think about switching to >> > using two-year terms? > > > I think this is an interesting idea, but I think we'd have to know why > people aren't running in the first place to know if it would be an effective > solution. For example, if few people are running because they are hesitant > about the time commitment, then having two year terms might exacerbate that. > I agree that there haven't been enough candidates the past few elections, > and some action should be taken to solve the issue. I'd like to hear why > people who considered running didn't do so, and what would make them > consider running in the future.
I agree with Meg, first and foremost we need to identify the reasoning behind not so many people launching candidacies. Addressing directly the $SUBJECT, I personally believe that despite the lack of candidates, a transition of responsibilities is key for a wealthy system. It gives new people a chance to push their ideas, prevents the creation of privileges, and gives credibility to the voters. I acknowledge that the board power is somehow limited and it is often just "representative", but even in this matters I would always welcome an alternation of members in a short period. > > Thanks, > Meg > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
