On Thursday, 07 December 2017 at 18:54, 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. Who is "we" that "decided" to cancel the running elections? What were the reasons for this "decision"? I object to this strongly. It doesn't look like this "decision" was made through an open process as is the usual Fedora way. I can't even find a Council ticket for this or a thread in the council-discuss mailing list. I'm afraid I'm losing confidence that the current Council is capable of leading Fedora if they cannot even hold an election according to the current documented rules without breaking them in more than one way. I haven't checked if elections to the Council and Mindshare were organized according to policy (maybe I should!), but with FESCo elections, the following were broken: 1. Candidate nominations were accepted later than 3 days before the voting period started. This contradicts https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FESCo_election_policy#Candidates 2. Candidates whose interviews weren't ready for publication before the start of the voting period were not disqualified. This contradicts https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Development/SteeringCommittee/Nominations Due to not having enough (number of open seats + 25%) candidates on the day before the voting period, the nomination period was extended by 3 days. Arguably, the extension should have happened 3 days earlier and should have been made longer than 3 days because extending by 3 days on the eve of the voting period start still doesn't give anyone a chance to be nominated according to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FESCo_election_policy#Candidates . I'd have extended by at least a week, also due to infrastructure instability this week. The interview readiness deadline was, suprisingly, extended by a week, allowing candidates who couldn't be bothered to write their interviews to be voted in anyway. Nothing was said about disqualifying candidates who'd fail to publish their interviews despite getting votes in the first few days of the elections. Last but not least, I wonder why all elections are being cancelled instead of just FESCo. This was not explained, either. With sad regards, Dominik -- Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and oppression to develop psychic muscles. -- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
