[Ambassadors] famsco nomination time is over in 24 h !!!

[Neville A. Cross]

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Francesco Ugolini
<fugolini at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>>
>> I agree having a short statement is useful. Is it required? Do we
>> accept nominations that don't include them?
>
>I think we haven't to set up limits: someone express him/herself with
>more words, someone else, instead, need only three words (no one is
>better, it's just a question of style, like behing Orwell or Joyce
>:)).
>
>The second question has a simple answer: no words, means no interest
>or no motivation to run. I think everyone has an idea, event "Organize
>Events for pets" (n.b. just an exageration).
>
>Moreover, he/she could have ALL the time needed to write this. So,
>just keep it blank when you take a decision, but in the following
>days, please, add even a brief statement.
>
>That's a reasonable and democratic way, and everytime it works fine.
>

What triggered my complain probably is because there is not a time
frame for writing statements.
What about setting a rule, that it is okey if you don't want to write
any statement, but the wiki will freeze at the time that nominations
are closed. Or even freeze the statements declarations two days after
nominations are closed.

Probably it is just me looking for a more organized way when there is
no real need for more rules.

>> Just to be clear I wasn't suggesting we put the names in alphabetical
>> order. I just used that as an example of one rule that exists
>> elsewhere for ordering the names on the nomination page. Having them
>> appear in the order the nominations were made seems good to me too,
>> maybe even better since it carries some information along with it.
>>
>> I don't think we need to do anything this time around, but if people
>> would like a more specific rule for next time they can suggest one. :)
>
>Just sort them in alphabetical order. Nobody will complain it ;)
>(FAmSCo will do this)
>
>Hoping it could clear the point
>
>Regards

When I pointed to the order, I just pointed that most running
candidates just wrote their name at the bottom of the list. And them
some one put his name on top. It seems rude to me, but it is not
against any rule.
I think going alphabetically will help avoid this perceptions. Not
sure if it is needed this time, as there was not rule. If this is
going to be applied now, I volunteer to do the wiki editing. But I
will not undertake action unless is agreed. I still think that should
be left for next election and a rule should be written before next
election. I am not a fan of changing rules at the middle of the game.

best regards

-- 
Neville
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Yn1v
Linux User # 473217

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Check: http://www.clickmanagua.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -