[Ambassadors] Are ambassadors happy with range voting for FAmSCo?

[inode0]

On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Max Spevack <mspevack at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, inode0 wrote:
>
>> Perhaps we can address some of the more cosmetic suggestions made in this
>> thread as well. These are all very minor things. I can write up a new
>> proposed wiki page but I think making these changes is something FAmSCo can
>> approve or not for future elections without any big fuss.
>
> This seems like a good idea to me.  Let's get a proposal up, have some
> conversation, and eventually come to something that FAMSCO can +1 but that
> will be able to satisfy two sets of people:
>
> (1) The people who don't have any issue with the current FAMSCO elections --
> we want to make sure that we don't create new problems.
>
> (2) The people who have suggestions about how we can improve things -- we
> want to make sure that we are addressing concerns.
>
> I also think that once we +1 something, we should also agree that we won't
> revisit the issue for 2 elections, so that we can make the reforms needed,
> and then move on to other things.

My proposed changes are reflected here now.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors/SteeringCommittee/Election/Rules

Really the changes I've suggested are very very minor. I want the
discussion of matters of timing to be less specific so that scheduling
the general elections can be done smoothly without worrying about the
specific details of X has to he 2 days before Y for the FAmSCo
election and so on. I propose that we keep nominations on the wiki in
the order they were made and I reworded a couple of things without
changing any substance.

If there are any questions please feel free to ask.

John