On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 06:54:29PM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote: > During the Autumn 2017 Election cycle we wanted to try a new approach > in the way how Elections are organized [1]. Unfortunately, at the > beginning of the Voting period we realized the new way does not work > as expected [2] and even we tried to put some mitigation plan in place > [3], we have not succeeded. To come up with some workable solution we > have decided to cancel the currently running Autumn 2017 Elections and > start it again in early January 2018. In upcoming days I will publish > a schedule for the January 2018 Elections as well as more details on > how we are going to organize it. > > [1] https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/135 > [2] https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/153 > [3] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ambassadors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/thread/QDZYPM6HKYB7A4DY2DQW7CM2HTEZAQJJ/ IMHO questionnaires can and should be reduced to a minimum amount of relevant writing. For instance: * What experience makes you suited for this elected body? * What goals do you have for being on this body if elected? Deflating expectations around these governing groups would help make them feel more accessible and interesting to contributors. After all, we're talking about voluntary positions in a free software project, not bodies with vast legislative or executive power. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com _______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list -- council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to council-discuss-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
