Hi. While the nominations are running, I would like to give some thought to how the vote should be.
I assume people being nominated have been contacted by those nominating, so we can assume they are up for election. If not it is important to know if the nominees volunteer. For the vote, I would suggest a couple of things: - ask the candidates to present, how they expect (no guarantees) to use their AOO time and especially how they see a way out of our current situation. - If the "winning" candidate is less than 3 (binding) votes from the second, we should run a second vote only between number 1 and 2 (maybe also 3, depending on the scores). The reason being that other candidates makes the comparison unfair. In my opinion a chair, who wants to be active, can only do so if he/she has a high backing of the PMC group and the community at large. I am aware that the vote rules are set solely by the PMC, and the ASF Bylaws; so please read this as a recommendation. rgds jan i
