<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2016-10-11 12:08 PM, Chris Dent
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:alpine.OSX.2.20.1610111642240.40296@shine.local"
type="cite">
<br>
Based on the turnout numbers and a bit of unscientific number
<br>
crunching on the voting results it seems that the electorate was
<br>
rather more engaged this time around. That's _great_.
<br>
<br>
As others have said I imagine some significant part of that was
<br>
because of more than one mailing of the ballots to help everyone
<br>
remember. I think there were probably other factors too:
<br>
<br>
* There was a large pool of candidates this time around from
several
<br>
different places on the OpenStack map. That makes for some
happy:
<br>
it wasn't the same old thing.
<br>
<br>
* The questioning and other discussion that happened last week was
<br>
engaging and interesting and made the process something more
than
<br>
"I've heard of this person before".
<br>
<br>
Therefore I think next time around we should have that week of
<br>
discussion before the week of voting. Its impact may be greater
<br>
when people have time to reflect on the discussion before voting.
<br>
<br>
Instead of two week process, make it three:<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Again as I replied to Ed's post, I think we can find options that
fit in the current timeframe.<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-October/105449.html">http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-October/105449.html</a><br>
<br>
Thank you,<br>
Anita.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:alpine.OSX.2.20.1610111642240.40296@shine.local"
type="cite">
<br>
1. nominations
<br>
2. discussion
<br>
3. voting
<br>
<br>
I don't think we need to make the second week super formal. I hope
<br>
we can rely on at least some people to step up with interesting
<br>
questions.
<br>
<br>
Aside from that, more radical things we may want to consider
<br>
include:
<br>
<br>
* Getting rid of self nomination. Nominations come from the
<br>
electorate at large. They can be refused of course.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
What is the current problem with self nomination?<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:alpine.OSX.2.20.1610111642240.40296@shine.local"
type="cite">
<br>
* Term limits, either absolute or consecutive. The principles[1]
<br>
enshrine regular handover of power but since that's not always
<br>
been demonstrated, perhaps it needs to be formalized?<br>
<br>
* [your idea here please]
<br>
<br>
<br>
[1]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://governance.openstack.org/reference/principles.html#changes-in-leadership-are-good">http://governance.openstack.org/reference/principles.html#changes-in-leadership-are-good</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe">OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>