Re: Term duration for board members (was GNOME Board of Directors Foundation Elections 2017 - Candidates)

Hello,

On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 7:10 PM, meg ford <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
> On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Alexandre Franke <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Michael Catanzaro
>> <[email protected]> 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
> [email protected]
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
>