On 06/14/2018 12:13 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: >> I would also double the terms served by the candidates (at least for >> FESCo), since otherwise we'd wind up with twice as many candidates >> on the ballot at each election, which would make the elections more >> confusing (more names to recognize, more candidate interviews to >> read) and could backfire on us (as I'd expect voters are more likely >> to vote in simpler elections). Longer terms would also make the >> results of the elections more consequential, i.e. it becomes more >> important to vote if you care about FESCo because the people elected >> are going to be there for two years instead of one.
> There's another aspect of burnout: two years is a big commitment. In > the past, we've bad people who really were getting burned out or busy > with other commitments but who felt they couldn't really step down > without abandoning their responsibilities. If we did go to two year > terms, I'd rather see one year + automatic re-up if you want. Another way to achieve a similar goal (fewer elections) is to have all of FESCo swap in/out together, rather than tick-tocking 4 and 5 seats. This way we keep a year long term, but also only one election per year. Downside is that it would be possible (though I'd guess unlikely) for all of FESCo to suddenly change to 9 different people and there'd be no members who know the current state of things. We would also need to do something a little awkward to get into this state since we currently have staggered terms. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/BPISSM2LNTQ5WBMLNW6Y7BZ5WYFNOX67/
