Re: Constitutional amendment: reduce the length of DPL election process
On Tuesday 31 July 2007 22:38, Martin Schulze wrote:
> FWIW, I believe that 2 years is too long, both for the DPL who may have
> to assign much more time to it than now, and for the project that may
> suffer under one DPL and would suffer even longer.
I wonder if a better course might not be to keep the term at one year
but move the election forward three months. Not many people can commit
to a year of being DPL on short notice. Being DPL-in-waiting for a few
months allows people to organize their personal lives and also provides
time to prepare for the major projects they intend to pursue as DPL.
--Mike Bird, non-DD