Re: Constitutional amendment: reduce the length of DPL election process
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. Given an apparently non-active
incumbent and a much-promising challenger, people are more likely to
vote for the much-promising challenger (provided this challenger is
promising what the electorate wants, of course). It doesn't matter
whether the incumbent is really non-active, or whether they've had to do
much behind-the-scenes work to be able to get something done. Having a
two-year term allows them a bit more leeway in that regard. But that's
just my opinion; YMMV, and I never got any classes in anything related
to political sciences.
Additionally, I do think that having a vote about a new leader every
year gets old rather quickly, with the electorate having hardly
forgotten the previous elections as the next already start.
--
<Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
-- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22
Reply to: