On Thu, May 22, 2025 at 11:08:57AM +0100, Robie Basak wrote: > Providing at least six valid nominations are received, voting > shall commence on 2025-06-12 and shall last for approximately seven > days, ending on or around 2025-06-19.
We've had four nominations out of the six required for a meaningful vote, so I'm postponing the election schedule for the time being. Getting enough volunteers has been a struggle for a number of years now. Resignations and absentees have also caused considerable difficulties in making decisions, as the DMB requires a simple majority of all board members to make most decisions. In recent elections the electorate had the option to exclude a particular candidate by choosing the "No further candidates" option[1] But it had never executed this option in practice. With fewer volunteers than seats, this is the only function of the election that would remain in practice. It seems unnecessary to make everyone to go through the whole thing just for that. So I wonder if it's worth continuing with elections at all? What if the Technical Board were to just appoint DMB members as they felt appropriate with a simple announcement, inviting prospective members to apply to the TB directly? We'd rely on the TB's judgement, but the TB is elected by the same body so fundamentally we'd still be selecting DMB members, just indirectly. If volunteers were to increase in number in the future, we could go back to the election process. Here's a concrete proposal: 1. No more DMB elections for now, including this one. 2. The DMB remains at a nominal seven seats. 3. When the DMB needs members, the TB will ask for suitably qualified volunteers to apply privately. 4. The TB reserves their option to exclude particular volunteers (privately), but this should only happen under exceptional circumstances. 5. The TB announces new appointments which can therefore happen at any time. 6. We'd like DMB members to commit to a two year minimum, but DMB members can resign at any time, as before. In practice, given we have a shortage of volunteers, they'll stay for as long as they continue to volunteer. 7. If the TB finds that they consistently have more volunteers than seats, they expect to switch back to the election system. 8. We send the current list of nominations to the TB for their consideration. Feedback appreciated. Robie [1] Effectively this was a traditional "none of the above" choice; the different wording was to avoid ambiguity due to ballot ordering presentation in CIVS.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
