On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 18:15 +0200, Christian.Iseli@xxxxxxxx wrote: > fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx said: > > But now to the real topic of this mail: What do all of you think about the > > whole election. Was it a good idea? > > Yes. > > > Or only wasted time? > > No. > > > "Total Ballots: 69" > > (we have round about 270 people that were permitted to vote) looks a bit sad > > IMHO. > > So ? If the remaining 201 people don't have an opinion, that's their right. > Maybe they'll form an opinion over time, and participate in the next election. > > > Should we do another election in the future? > > Yes. > > > When? Reelect half of the seats > > after FC7 (FC6 is to short)? The other half after FC8, then the first half > > again after FC9 (and so forth)? > > Yes, I think that was the idea. > > > Anything else we should handle differently in the future? > > I see Seth, Ville, and Michael got re-elected even though it said on the > nomination page: > nominated for the new FESCo as contingent by skvidal > (contingent: if no one else wants it - they will step up and do the job) > > I know I abstained voting for them because of this message... > > I do hope they'll accept the job now. > > Maybe next time it'd be better if the nomination page is a bit clearer and > doesn't mislead me into thinking some of the people there might prefer not > being elected. > Actually. You need to email me or find me on irc. We should discuss that very issue. As discussed with Thorsten -seeing as there are other people who want the job I'd happily step aside for you to take my spot. -sv -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
