On 2016-10-11 02:07 PM, Clay Gerrard wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Anita Kuno <ante...@anteaya.info> wrote:
On 2016-10-11 01:40 PM, Ed Leafe wrote:
On Oct 11, 2016, at 12:17 PM, Anita Kuno <ante...@anteaya.info> wrote:
There really needs to be a period when a) we know who all the candidates
are, and b) voting has not yet begun.
Why?
The voting period is open for a period of several days, voters have the
ability to vote at any time during that voting period.
Because many people vote as soon as they receive their ballot.
That is their choice.
Anita,
I agree, that voters may choose to refrain from voting. I don't hear
anyone saying "people *can not* make time for thoughtful reflection on the
candidates" - but suggestion that perhaps they *did not*? Is there anyway
we could get numbers about how many voters waited until the end of week
like I did?
No, there is no report from the service that outputs timestamps of when
votes were submitted.
Now, if the supervisor of the election choose to monitor the status page
of the poll whilst the poll was happening that person could track how
many votes were submitted at the time the status page was rendered,
however it wouldn't be possible to independently verify this information
and I personally feel asking an election official to add this to their
duties (what happens if they got pulled onto a more important task?)
isn't something I would feel comfortable with. Administering elections
is already stressful enough.
If most voters did wait until later in the week, I think we can reject the
premise as false and accept that the week while voting is open *is* the
time in the process that most of the electorate uses for reflection on the
candidates.
If many *did* vote early in the week before some policy/platform points
were discussed one might even assume these voters have some remorse -
perhaps they will behave differently next time? Not known.
Agreed, this is not known. What also is unknown is the number of people
that voted early, followed the discussions and didn't feel any remorse
in their voting choices.
OTOH, if we actively broadcast a period of time with the expressed purpose
of facilitating this discussion I think it sends a message that we as a
community expect this discussion to happen and have an impact on the
results of the election. Is there a *downside* to a 3 week election period
as proposed by Ed, Chris and others?
Yes, there is a downside. As I have said several times already in this
thread, expanding the duration of the election from beginning to end
increases the time commitment and stress for the election officials. The
job already takes a lot of planning and a minimum of one month per
release for the ptl and tc elections, for the nomination period and the
voting.
Now if people want to explore other opportunities for how candidates are
differentiated that is fine, so far we seem to be circling around
different versions of what I had offered. I do think we can come up with
other ideas. I also think that implementing other ideas can be done in
the given time frame.
The option I offered was completed during the election timeframe, I
didn't need to expand the election timeframe to offer additional
communication about candidates.
Thank you,
Anita.
-Clay
I know that I typically do so that it doesn’t get lost under the flood
of email.
I have found putting a star on the email when it comes it helps to ensure
I don't lose it, but everyone has a different email organizing workflow.
This wouldn’t be so bad if you could later change your vote, but once it
is cast, it can’t be changed. What that means is that if a candidate I knew
little about says something that either interests me or turns me off, I can
*use* that information.
You still can now, you just have to choose to listen to candidates prior
to voting.
Monty suggested somewhere that we reissue the email ballots everyday
(since we had email issues this time, I have no idea if that would result
in us being kicked off the service we currently use or not). If the issue
is, I want to ensure I can find my ballot when I need it, I think we can
explore options that don't include requiring election officials to expand
their commitment for an additional week.
A voter can ask the panel of candidates any question they wish such that
they are satisfied prior to voting.
Of course; no one has said otherwise. But if someone else asks a question
that may not have occurred to me to ask, the answers given can still be
influential on my choices. Look at Gordon Chung’s question in this recent
cycle: I’m sure that there were lots of people who benefited from that
question and the many answers, not just Gordon.
I know I benefited from Gord's question, both as a candidate and as a
voter. Thank you, Gord.
Again, I feel the choice exists.
Additionally should the decision be made to go forward with some form of
the candidate answers as I offered to the electorate in October 2014, those
answers could be available as platforms are posted such that all responses
are available as soon as the poll begins.
I think that this is a great idea, and would be willing to help in the
effort to make that happen again.
Thanks Ed, it felt satisfying to offer it when I did it. I hope others
feel the same as you.
Thanks,
Anita.
-- Ed Leafe
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
