[ELECTION] Important - Good and Bad news

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[ELECTION] Important - Good and Bad news

Göran Krampe
Hi all!

I have been slacking a bit on handling this years Election, and the
result is now that we have a slight "conundrum".

The good news is that we have 7 candidates announced, 4 re-running and 3
new candidates (thus 3 deciding to not re-run this year):

http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6162


...the bad news is that the board usually has 7 members, so we are quite
short on candidates in fact.

Instead of making an immediate decision on how to handle this I want you
- the community - to speak up. What should we do? Options:

1. Prolong the candidacy period, and/or let it continue up until the day
before the election starts. Hopefully getting more candidates.

2. Skip the rest and just grab the 7 we have! :)

3. Decide to lower the number of seats on the board.


...well, I can't think of more options right now. What do you all think?

regards, Göran

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELECTION] Important - Good and Bad news

Edgar J. De Cleene-3



On 3/28/11 6:42 AM, "Göran Krampe" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi all!
>
> I have been slacking a bit on handling this years Election, and the
> result is now that we have a slight "conundrum".
>
> The good news is that we have 7 candidates announced, 4 re-running and 3
> new candidates (thus 3 deciding to not re-run this year):
>
> http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6162
>
>
> ...the bad news is that the board usually has 7 members, so we are quite
> short on candidates in fact.
>
> Instead of making an immediate decision on how to handle this I want you
> - the community - to speak up. What should we do? Options:
>
> 1. Prolong the candidacy period, and/or let it continue up until the day
> before the election starts. Hopefully getting more candidates.
>
> 2. Skip the rest and just grab the 7 we have! :)
>
> 3. Decide to lower the number of seats on the board.
>
>
> ...well, I can't think of more options right now. What do you all think?
>
> regards, Göran



Changing the rules to this time is not good.

It's not the first Board and Squeakers should know who have the time and the
will for serve all.




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELECTION] Important - Good and Bad news

Bert Freudenberg
In reply to this post by Göran Krampe

On 28.03.2011, at 11:42, Göran Krampe wrote:

> Hi all!
>
> I have been slacking a bit on handling this years Election, and the result is now that we have a slight "conundrum".
>
> The good news is that we have 7 candidates announced, 4 re-running and 3 new candidates (thus 3 deciding to not re-run this year):
>
> http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6162
>
>
> ...the bad news is that the board usually has 7 members, so we are quite short on candidates in fact.
>
> Instead of making an immediate decision on how to handle this I want you - the community - to speak up. What should we do? Options:
>
> 1. Prolong the candidacy period, and/or let it continue up until the day before the election starts. Hopefully getting more candidates.
>
> 2. Skip the rest and just grab the 7 we have! :)
>
> 3. Decide to lower the number of seats on the board.
>
>
> ...well, I can't think of more options right now. What do you all think?
>
> regards, Göran

I'm for extending the running period. I'm sure we can find a few more candidates.

Juan listed some people (I'm forwarding his message below). How about you encourage them to run? Just a little private email might be enough ...

- Bert -


Begin forwarded message:

> From: Juan Vuletich <[hidden email]>
> Date: 25. März 2011 16:15:45 MEZ
> To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <[hidden email]>
> Cc: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: Who's running (Re: board candidacy (was: Re: [squeak-dev] [ANN] Squeak Oversight Board Election 2011!!!))
> Reply-To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <[hidden email]>
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> I'm not running this year. Board meetings are friendly and fun, and I had a very good time being in. But I don't think my presence last year was very useful, and there are better people for that than me. I think the Squeak boards needs people with the following skills / roles:
> - Frequent commiters and original developers of significant parts of Squeal and support tools. People who actually contribute to Squeak trunk should be making decisions and leading the community.
> - People with strong investments in Squeak, mainly developers of applications (commercial or not, but with many users) should be represented.
> - Developers of packages and frameworks for Squeak, especially if those are multi-dialect.
> - Communicators with other communities, organization and industrial and academic people.
> - People willing to commit effort for the development of Squeak, even if they don't fall into any of the above.
> - People willing to understand the needs and possibilities of the community, and able to turn that into a mid/long term vision. I guess this is the hardest of all.
>
> The people I'd like to see running for the board includes:
> - Current Board members: Andreas, Bert, Chris, Craig, Jecel and Randal (you all did a great job!).
> - Levente
> - Nicolas
> - David
> - Eliot
> - Igor
> - Casey
> - Bernhard Pieber
> - Mathew
> - Hilarie
> - Colin
> - Stephane Rollandin
> - Chris Cunnington
> - Nikolay
> - Ricardo Morán
> - Javier Pimás
> - Someone from Seaside, Aida, Iliad, Gemstone and other high-impact projects
> - Getting interest from the Scratch people would be wonderful. Same for NewSpeak.
> - We already have on the board or on the above list people from Cog, VM dev, Etoys, Cobalt, DrGeo, muO, SqueakNOS and several other important projects.
>
> I'm sure I must be forgetting people and projects and I apologize for that. Anyway, I think all these people are more important than me on the board. Please folks, consider running for the Board!
>
> Also, I want this to start a discussion about who and why we want on the Board. Please answer with your own thoughts on all this!
>
> Myself, I'm not a frequent trunk commiter, I'm not developing apps or packages for Squeak (I do that for Cuis) and I'm not a great communicator. I do, however have a mid / long term vision for what a free Smalltalk system should be, and I'm following it with Cuis. I wholeheartedly support cherry-picking from Cuis for Squeak and derivatives, and I appreciate and support people doing so. But it still seems that my vision doesn't fit the majority of the community. And the Squeak community doesn't need additional flame wars or schisms. Therefore I didn't push for it in the Board meetings, I just was supportive to any initiative in that direction. This is perhaps the main reason why I think I didn't add as much value to the Board as some of you (and me!) might have expected.
>
> I want to thank the other Board members for your work. I also appreciate those who re-run, and I understand those who won't. While it is true that being in the Board is not much work, it is an important service to the community and I feel honored for being in last year. I also want to thank to community for making that happen.
>
> Cheers,
> Juan Vuletich


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELECTION] Important - Good and Bad news

ching
In reply to this post by Göran Krampe
#2 sounds good to me.

 Ching

2011/3/28 Göran Krampe <[hidden email]>
Hi all!

I have been slacking a bit on handling this years Election, and the result is now that we have a slight "conundrum".

The good news is that we have 7 candidates announced, 4 re-running and 3 new candidates (thus 3 deciding to not re-run this year):

http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6162


...the bad news is that the board usually has 7 members, so we are quite short on candidates in fact.

Instead of making an immediate decision on how to handle this I want you - the community - to speak up. What should we do? Options:

1. Prolong the candidacy period, and/or let it continue up until the day before the election starts. Hopefully getting more candidates.

2. Skip the rest and just grab the 7 we have! :)

3. Decide to lower the number of seats on the board.


...well, I can't think of more options right now. What do you all think?

regards, Göran




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELECTION] Important - Good and Bad news

radoslav hodnicak
In reply to this post by Göran Krampe
If there are no new candidates, I have no problems with #2 - we know who the people are and what they do.

rado

2011/3/28 Göran Krampe <[hidden email]>
Hi all!

I have been slacking a bit on handling this years Election, and the result is now that we have a slight "conundrum".

The good news is that we have 7 candidates announced, 4 re-running and 3 new candidates (thus 3 deciding to not re-run this year):

http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6162


...the bad news is that the board usually has 7 members, so we are quite short on candidates in fact.

Instead of making an immediate decision on how to handle this I want you - the community - to speak up. What should we do? Options:

1. Prolong the candidacy period, and/or let it continue up until the day before the election starts. Hopefully getting more candidates.

2. Skip the rest and just grab the 7 we have! :)

3. Decide to lower the number of seats on the board.


...well, I can't think of more options right now. What do you all think?

regards, Göran




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELECTION] Important - Good and Bad news

Juan Vuletich-4
In reply to this post by Göran Krampe
Göran Krampe wrote:

> Hi all!
>
> I have been slacking a bit on handling this years Election, and the
> result is now that we have a slight "conundrum".
>
> The good news is that we have 7 candidates announced, 4 re-running and
> 3 new candidates (thus 3 deciding to not re-run this year):
>
> http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6162
>
>
> ...the bad news is that the board usually has 7 members, so we are
> quite short on candidates in fact.
>
> Instead of making an immediate decision on how to handle this I want
> you - the community - to speak up. What should we do? Options:
>
> 1. Prolong the candidacy period, and/or let it continue up until the
> day before the election starts. Hopefully getting more candidates.
>
> 2. Skip the rest and just grab the 7 we have! :)
>
> 3. Decide to lower the number of seats on the board.
>
>
> ...well, I can't think of more options right now. What do you all think?
>
> regards, Göran

I think 1. is ok. Otherwise, I'd prefer doing the election as usual,
even if the result is already known. I'm against 2. and 3. Those would
be changing the rules to adapt to a specific situation. Rules should
last. (Maybe I'm too sensitive about this... I come from a country that
had a long tradition of breaking the Constitution. That was _never_ good
in the long run.)

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELECTION] Important - Good and Bad news

Randal L. Schwartz
>>>>> "Juan" == Juan Vuletich <[hidden email]> writes:

Juan> I think 1. is ok. Otherwise, I'd prefer doing the election as
Juan> usual, even if the result is already known. I'm against 2. and
Juan> 3. Those would be changing the rules to adapt to a specific
Juan> situation. Rules should last.

+1

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELECTION] Important - Good and Bad news

Casey Ransberger-2
In reply to this post by Juan Vuletich-4
+1, if we lag a bit finding another candidate, I think that's fine. I want to be able to say that we voted. I'm sorry that I can't actually do it this year everyone!



On Mar 28, 2011, at 4:52 AM, Juan Vuletich <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Göran Krampe wrote:
>> Hi all!
>>
>> I have been slacking a bit on handling this years Election, and the result is now that we have a slight "conundrum".
>>
>> The good news is that we have 7 candidates announced, 4 re-running and 3 new candidates (thus 3 deciding to not re-run this year):
>>
>> http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6162
>>
>>
>> ...the bad news is that the board usually has 7 members, so we are quite short on candidates in fact.
>>
>> Instead of making an immediate decision on how to handle this I want you - the community - to speak up. What should we do? Options:
>>
>> 1. Prolong the candidacy period, and/or let it continue up until the day before the election starts. Hopefully getting more candidates.
>>
>> 2. Skip the rest and just grab the 7 we have! :)
>>
>> 3. Decide to lower the number of seats on the board.
>>
>>
>> ...well, I can't think of more options right now. What do you all think?
>>
>> regards, Göran
>
> I think 1. is ok. Otherwise, I'd prefer doing the election as usual, even if the result is already known. I'm against 2. and 3. Those would be changing the rules to adapt to a specific situation. Rules should last. (Maybe I'm too sensitive about this... I come from a country that had a long tradition of breaking the Constitution. That was _never_ good in the long run.)
>
> Cheers,
> Juan Vuletich
>