Fedora Board election results

[Josh Boyer]

On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 14:21 -0400, Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Josh Boyer wrote:
> 
> >> With that in mind I want a picture of the breakdown between redhat and 
> >> non-redhat voters so I can know if we have done an appropriate job 
> >> communicating the importance of the board elections out into the 
> >> external community.
> >
> > Just assume we haven't done an appropriate job.  With a 6% voter
> > turnout, we have failed regardless.
> 
> Really?  Why?
> 
> Why is a 6% turnout necessarily a failure?

A bit of hyperbole on my part to illustrate a point.

> IMHO, a properly functioning governance body *should* be so effective that 
> no one cares much either way when it comes time to replace the membership. 
> >From my perspective, low turnout means low dissatisfaction.  All other 
> indicators seem to point to continued success for Fedora and its 
> contributors.

Low turnout can either mean low dissatisfaction, or high apathy.

> If there were endemic problems to the Fedora project that people wanted to 
> fix, well, then, there's a mechanism for the disaffected to create change. 
> If no one feels compelled to use that mechanism, is it necessarily a bad 
> thing?

Is it an end-of-the-world-we-suck thing?  No, probably not.  But I do
feel it's important to get as much of the voting body to vote as
possible.

> I myself almost didn't vote.  Why?  Because I liked the entire slate of 
> candidates.  In the end, I did vote, and I voted entirely for non-RH 
> candidates on principle... but I firmly believe that everyone elected will 
> do a great job, and I firmly believe that everyone not elected would also 
> have done a great job.

As do I.  But that might not always be the case.

josh