<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
+1 To what Joshua said.<br>
<br>
I would also like to understand what is the goal we are trying to
accomplish by moving this to a repo and submitting a CR and what
does this solve or improve on the current way we are doing things? <br>
<br>
Will it reduce noise? marginally (IMHO). <br>
<br>
Maish<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 08/22/15 06:02, Joshua Hesketh
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+DTi5zZU62gu1PDfZmM_Apuj2pQkBRoYPXopjyoSV6oo2=M8A@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">I'm struggling to think of a way this might help
enable discussions between nominees and voters about their
platforms. Since the tooling will send out the nomination
announcements the only real noise that is reduced is the
"nomination confirmed" type emails.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>While I think this sounds really neat, I'm not convinced
that it'll actually reduce noise on the mailing list if that
was the goal. I realise the primary goal is to help the
election officials, but perhaps we can achieve both of these
by a separate mailing list for both nomination announcements
and also platform discussions? This could be a first step and
then once we have the tooling to confirm a nominees validity
we could automate that first announcement email still.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Just a thought anyway.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Cheers,<br>
Josh</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 5:44 AM, Anita
Kuno <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:anteaya@anteaya.info" target="_blank">anteaya@anteaya.info</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span
class="">On 08/21/2015 03:37 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:<br>
> On 2015-08-21 14:32:50 -0400 (-0400), Anita Kuno
wrote:<br>
>> Personally I would recommend that the election
officials have<br>
>> verification permissions on the proposed repo and
the automation<br>
>> step is skipped to begin with as a way of
expediting the repo<br>
>> creation. Getting the workflow in place in enough
time that<br>
>> potential candidates can familiarize themselves
with the change,<br>
>> is of primary importance I feel. Automation can
happen after the<br>
>> workflow is in place.<br>
><br>
> Agreed, I'm just curious what our options actually
are for<br>
> automating the confirmation research currently
performed. It's<br>
> certainly not a prerequisite for using the new
repo/workflow in a<br>
> manually-driven capacity in the meantime.<br>
><br>
<br>
</span>Fair enough. I don't want to answer the question
myself as I feel it's<br>
best for the response to come from current election
officials.<br>
<br>
Thanks Jeremy,<br>
Anita.<br>
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5"></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>