On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 04:28:30 -0400, > Robyn Bergeron <rbergero@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> I suppose I may putting the cart before the horse here, so to speak, but >> was just thinking about the prospect of the following: >> (a) Coordination of additional elections by whichever teams elect to do so >> (b) If they are uncoordinated and more or less ad-hoc (everyone on >> different schedules) - if the election announcements would be endless, cause >> difficulty in (re)scheduling meetings, etc. >> (c) In either an uncoordinated case or a coordinated case - if that winds >> up being a lot more on the election coordinator's plate > > > I would expect any team elections to be fairly informal, sort of how teams > might elect their chairman. I would expect only team members would be doing > the voting for most of those groups and these could be done in a regular > team meeting. Yes, this is also what I was thinking. I'm not sure why a team with a limited number of people would choose to do a full Election run for this appointee. Seems like major overkill for groups that only have 7-9 members that can vote. josh _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
