On 08/30/2011 12:29 PM, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > Humm… An idea could be: I like Gunnar's proposal. Some nitpicks for clarity: > ‣ The term is defined to be for one year, with the possibility of one > automatic renewal > ‣ If by (election date + 10 months) This should be something like "between (election date + 9 months and election date + 10 months)" -- a DPL shouldn't be able to send this request at the start of their term. Or maybe, if they do people will think it is silly and say "no", and then the fact that it can be done only once per elected term will prevent them from doing so after they've proved themselves. Still, i'd prefer a strictly narrow window for this mechanism. > the DPL sends a (signed, > validated, blah) message, a simple referendum is held: secret vote > between a "yes" and a "no" (and... Further discussion? :-} ) If we have Further Discussion here, i think it would count the same as "no". > ‣ If the DPL seeking renewal gets a majority, his term is prolonged to > a second year > ‣ If the DPL does not get a majority, he can still participate in a > regular election > ‣ This mechanism can only be used once — A DPL wanting to run a third > term must win a regular (full) election I think this should be "used once for any regular full election" -- a DPL who wins a regular election, gets the extension, then wins a third election should be able to propose an extension for their 4th year (should we find some sucker^W^W^Wwonderful DPL who wants to do the job for 4 years running). --dkg
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature