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

Re: Constitutional amendment: reduce the length of DPL election process

On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 05:48:06PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Oh, that reminds me.
> I propose we change section 5.2 of the constitution concerning appointment
> of the Project Leader to reduce the nomination period to a week, and the
> voting period to two weeks. In wdiff format:
> =====
>   5.2. Appointment
>     1. The Project Leader is elected by the Developers.
>     2. The election begins [-nine-] {+six+} weeks before the leadership
>        post becomes vacant, or (if it is too late already) immediately.
>     3. For the [-following three weeks-] {+first week+} any Developer
>        may nominate themselves as a candidate Project [-Leader.-]
>        {+Leader, and summarise their plans for their term.+}
>     4. For three weeks after that no more candidates may be nominated;
>        candidates should use this time for campaigning [-(to make their
>        identities-] and [-positions known).-] {+discussion.+} If there
>        are no candidates at the end of the nomination period then the
>        nomination period is extended for [-three further weeks,-] {+an
>        additional week,+} repeatedly if necessary.
>     5. The next [-three-] {+two+} weeks are the polling period during
>        which Developers may cast their votes. Votes in leadership
>        elections are kept secret, even after the election is finished.
>     6. The options on the ballot will be those candidates who have
>        nominated themselves and have not yet withdrawn, plus None Of The
>        Above. If None Of The Above wins the election then the election
>        procedure is repeated, many times if necessary.
>     7. The decision will be made using the method specified in section
>        A.6 of the Standard Resolution Procedure. The quorum is the same
>        as for a General Resolution (4.2) and the default option is "None
>        Of The Above".
>     8. The Project Leader serves for one year from their election.
> =====
> Nominations this year were:
> 	1st week (4th-10th):
> 	     Gustavo Franco (5th)
> 	     Wouter Verhelst (6th)
> 	     Sven Luther (6th)
> 	     Aigars Mahinovs (9th)
> 	2nd week (11th-17th): 
> 	     Sam Hocevar (14th)
> 	3rd week (18th-24th):
> 	     Steve McIntyre (19th)
> 	     Raphael Hertzog (20th)
> 	     Anthony Towns (23rd)
> 	     Simon Richter (23rd)
> Nominations in 2006 were:
> 	1st week (5th - 11th)
> 	    Lars Wirzenius (10th - withdrawn on the 23rd)
> 	2nd week (12th - 18th)
> 	    Ari Pollak (18th)
> 	3rd week (19th - 26th)
> 	    Jeroen van Wolffelaar (19th)
> 	    Steve McIntyre (20th)
> 	    Anthony Towns (23rd)
> 	    Andreas Schuldei (23rd)
> 	    Ted Walther (25th)
> 	    Bill Allombert (26th)
> Nominations in 2005 were:
> 	1st week (7th - 13th)
> 	    Matthew Garrett (7th)
> 	    Andreas Schuldei (7th)
> 	2nd week (14th - 20th)
> 	3rd week (21st - 27th)
> 	    Angus Lees (24th)
> 	    Anthony Towns (25th)
> 	    Jonathan Walther (26th)
> 	    Branden Robinson (27th)
> That seems to imply people nominate either more or less as soon as
> nominations open, or a few days before they close (or, in Sam's case,
> when the date's convenient for a bit of fun); so reducing it from three
> weeks to one seems pretty feasible.
> Likewise, all our other votes have only needed two weeks (or less in
> the case of the recall votes) to resolve, so having an extra week for
> DPL elections seems unnecessary.
> Reducing the DPL election period from 17% of the year to 11% seems like
> a win to me. YMMV.

I can only second this.

While we're at it, I've long felt that a one-year DPL term is just too
short (because a DPL needs to spend a few months to get worked in, and
can't do all that much when the next election is about to turn up for
fear of being accused to be campaigning, often leaving only slightly
over half a year or so of time for real work to be done). If more people
feel like it, I'll draft up an amendment that turns it into a two-year
term, or so.

But I don't feel too strong about this, and I'll second the above

<Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
  -- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: