Open Stack

Based on the turnout numbers and a bit of unscientific number
crunching on the voting results it seems that the electorate was
rather more engaged this time around. That's _great_.

As others have said I imagine some significant part of that was
because of more than one mailing of the ballots to help everyone
remember. I think there were probably other factors too:

* There was a large pool of candidates this time around from several
   different places on the OpenStack map. That makes for some happy:
   it wasn't the same old thing.

* The questioning and other discussion that happened last week was
   engaging and interesting and made the process something more than
   "I've heard of this person before".

Therefore I think next time around we should have that week of
discussion before the week of voting. Its impact may be greater
when people have time to reflect on the discussion before voting.

Instead of two week process, make it three:

1. nominations
2. discussion
3. voting

I don't think we need to make the second week super formal. I hope
we can rely on at least some people to step up with interesting
questions.

Aside from that, more radical things we may want to consider
include:

* Getting rid of self nomination. Nominations come from the
   electorate at large. They can be refused of course.

* Term limits, either absolute or consecutive. The principles[1]
   enshrine regular handover of power but since that's not always
   been demonstrated, perhaps it needs to be formalized?

* [your idea here please]


[1] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/principles.html#changes-in-leadership-are-good

-- 
Chris Dent               ┬─┬ノ( º _ ºノ)        https://anticdent.org/
freenode: cdent                                         tw: @anticdent