Open Stack

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 10:23 AM Ed Leafe <ed at leafe.com> wrote:
>
> On Feb 25, 2019, at 8:01 PM, Zane Bitter <zbitter at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > This is a problem for OpenStack, for at least the reason you mentioned above: TC members don't have much of a mandate if they didn't actually have an election.
>
> That’s a good point: do you (all candidates; not just Zane) see the election as being a mandate for specific things? Candidates run on different platforms, expressing different desires for changes they would like to make. Do you see the result of a TC election as a mandate to go out and do those things, and not to do the things that the losing candidates espoused?

Yes.  I do think however that sometimes it can be really hard for us
to do things as an individual if the rest of the committee disagrees

i.e.: i still think weekly meetings are useful, will get things done,
will help us stay in sync and give an easily parse-able thing for the
rest of the community to visit.. but, I haven't had success with that.

> The counter, and extremely cynical, argument here is that people don’t really weigh the specific proposals of the individual candidates and choose those most in alignment with their feelings, but instead choose people who they either a) worked with at some point and didn’t find them to be a jerk, or b) have seen their name around for a while, and figure they must know what’s going on, or c) have the same employer, or d) some other non-issue-related reason. If this cynical point of view is closer to how you see reality, does that represent a mandate at all?
>
>
> -- Ed Leafe
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Mohammed Naser — vexxhost
-----------------------------------------------------
D. 514-316-8872
D. 800-910-1726 ext. 200
E. mnaser at vexxhost.com
W. http://vexxhost.com