On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 08:25 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Jul 2008, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > > >> Comments appreciated either here or in the discussion page for the > >> proposal on the wiki. I'll bring this before the Board for final > >> discussion and a vote at our August 5th session, which will likely be > >> a public IRC meeting. > > Is there a compelling reason to make the non-eligible period a full > term? It increases the record keeping needed to tell when someone is > eligible vs " the Board member becomes ineligible to run in the next > election. Their eligibility is restored for the election following that." Compelling, no. Rational, I think so -- the extra lag time leaves more time for other people to be elected since there are two or three seats turning over at each release. I should note that this policy somewhat codifies the suggestion of a couple other Board members, so I'm not wedded to it as is. If the community thinks a one-release "cooling off period" is appropriate, I'm fine with that. The overall objective is to make sure that interested, qualified community members who can't spend the majority of their time working on Fedora, can still be competitive in our elections. -- Paul W. Frields gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://paul.frields.org/ - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
