On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Jon Stanley <jonstanley@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Also, destroying the confidentiality of the voting process (which is > what you're doing by forcing people to come out and say how they > voted) destroys the integrity of said process, in any context (be it > an election for the Fedora Board or the President of the United > States) Forced? That is a bit strong. Bob is asking for strong personal endorsements by 10 individuals as a mandate for running. Personal endorsements ahead of an election are a generally accepted part of politics even in US. So are election day voter polling. Making a strong personal endorsement ahead of an election does not change the fact that actual election is anonymous. As long as the granular range data is not made public any of those 10 people who endorse him ahead of the election could change their vote and Bob would not be the wiser. What he is doing is ballsy and it certainly makes a statement but it in no way undermines the anonymous nature of the vote itself. He's making a strong statement as to what a personal endorsement looks like in a range voting scenario. Is it a pretty high bar to ask from 10 individuals in terms of a personal endorsement? Absolutely. But considering there's been some grumbling about whether the voting turnout and general election participation represent a strong enough mandate for any sitting board member... I think challenging community members to make a strong personal endorsement of some nature is an interesting approach to get ahead of that particular criticism. Is this the right approach towards personal endorsement? I have no idea. It's ballsy. I like Bob, I even think being on the Board might help him be a better community leader, knock off some of the rough edges, in the same way a rock tumbler shines up the dirty pieces of quartz from my drive way when I was a kid. Am I ready to tell Bob I'm going to forgo voting for anyone else as an endorsement? I'm not sure. What I am sure of is if I do, do that, and I _voluntarily_ give up the ability to range vote for anyone else, I'm definitely going to hold Bob accountable as _my_ representative in a way that range voting equally for 3 people would not. And maybe that's Bob's point. Maybe he wants to be accountable to some constituency...some group...who will chew his ear off if he's taking wrong action. The range voting mechanism may help hedge against polarization into camps but maybe it also disassociates the chosen centrists from the rank and file. Maybe personal endorsements help re-attach and re-engage a little bit more strongly. Maybe Bob's way of approaching endorsement isn't the optimal way, but it sure is interesting. It's definitely made me stop and think. -jef _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
