Re: election process for EB members

On Sun, Jan 30, 2005 at 12:20:17AM +0200, Anton Wolkov wrote:
> let's think of all this, what possible results a vote may give,
> EB staff stays as it is, which gives nothing but an illusion of democracy.

No, if those with a stake in Blitzed wish for its EB to stay the
same then that's democracy, not an illusion of it.

> EB staff changes which creates real democracy with it's problems, and
> in the end may fail miserably, or give nothing.

It depends on who exactly gets to vote, but I know I wouldn't like
to carry on doing EB tasks unless it was felt I was doing a good
job.  I couldn't then be sure that whoever comes next was going to
do a good job, but that's just life isn't it..

> since the current EB would probably have a veto power over this vote,
> I believe, everyone who wants to vote, should post a public comment on
> why, and later this comment will be reviewed by moderators, and only
> if comment makes sense, and you can see the person is not casting
> random votes it should be accepted.

It seems silly to give us veto over a vote that removes one or more
of us, and I don't see the sense of requring people votes to be
"moderated" and judged worthy or not either.  If there were to be
elections then I think it would be best to think carefully about who
can vote rather than letting everyone vote and then trying to make
sure they did so for the "right reasons".

Some suggestions for sensibly restricting the voting population:

- blitzed staff

- server admins

- users who have had a registered nick for more than 1 year

- some combination of the above

_______________________________________________
public mailing list
public-Hb7ITwsGSD4lroQnaJEqWdi2O/[email protected]
http://lists.blitzed.org/listinfo/public

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFB/DJ2IJm2TL8VSQsRArV0AJ9aQGMjrFJgbxfZ62PZKEADmWuxiACg+fFQ
Gbtei8hPVqZbDZDl3/qx6oc=
=iTjZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----