On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 12:53:11PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 02:30:31PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > Personally, I think annual elections are a good thing, pretty much for the > > reasons outlined by Jeff in: > > http://lists.linux.org.au/archives/linux-aus/2005-July/msg00030.html > I'll summarize those as "if people want continuity in people on (the > board/the DPL position/whatever), they can re-elect them". > I don't think it works that way. Well, it does elsewhere. On the other hand, there were a couple of assumptions in Jeff's message that don't seem to apply to Debian: ] We don't have a lot of churn and we don't have too many people standing for ] the committee. Thus, elections are more of a checkpoint than an earthquake. ] They give the committee the opportunity to step back, reassess, take new ] ideas into account, and move on. Plus, it's unlikely that former members ] would completely disappear - they can always help the transition. I mean: we do have a fair bit of churn, we do have a bunch of people standing for DPL (eight or nine people per position, as opposed to SPI's latest election which had 2.2 people per position, eg), elections do have a bit of a tendency towards being earthquakes, and former members often do disappear... Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature