[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Further draft Social Committee text

On Fri, 29 Jun 2007, Raphael Hertzog wrote:

You really don't want to have 10 votes in parallel... replying 10 times to
10 mails, possibly typing the GPG passphrase several times.

Yes, this is a real drawback of this procedure.  I think my very personal
way to go with this to vote only against those people I would think that
should leave their seat in the SC and just do not vote pro at all.  I'm
aware that this would not work if everybody would behave equally because
very view votes against a member could remove it from the SC.  I have no
idea whether we should adapt the rules to the lazyness I expressed above:
If there are a number of "No" against one member of the SC that exceedes
a certain quorum this seat has to be replaced.

You might tell it's only a "technical problem" in devotee, but until you
fix devotee to handle several ballots in the same mail, I won't endorse
this choice. For me concorcet is perfectly able to sort out those have
been ranked above NOTA from those who have been ranked below NOTA. I
really don't see the problem.

I personally could also live with that, but as I said I have the feeling
(note "feeling" is not based on experience or facts I have) that it is not
as effective to replace a member.

Kind regards



Reply to: