[svlug] Electing the next set of officers
alvin at mail.Linux-Consulting.com
Thu Jan 24 20:06:03 PST 2008
hi ya tim
> Tim Bird wrote:
> The idea that an elected person can appoint their successor
> without group approval is very weird indeed.
and was the initial cause of the flamefest
i dont understand why its okay the 2nd time around
> Here's my two cents. I assume the organization has no bylaws,
> but at least some rudimentary past processes (e.g. past
> voting procedures, terms of officers, etc.)
we were previously following past history of the way
previous officers were elected
and still should until the new "written" rules are in place
> Absent a set of bylaws, I would recommend something very simple.
> Of course I have no "right" to call for a vote,
sure you do ... its your svlug community
that needs to be cleaned up
> I would recommend the following process:
> 1) a short (due to circumstances) period of time for candidates
> to announce themselves
the following has announced they're running:
- ed ...... pres .. formerly vp until paul gave up
- bruce ... pres
- alvin ... vp ... but might go for pres if the same
"presidency" problems persist
my set of proposed changes was previously posted
- lisa .... vp ... i'm not sure if she has posted
explicitly to be running vs she'll do it if
she's asked to do so ( not the same as explicit declaration )
- any other folks should step up ... or you're stuck
for the next few months/years or until another flamefest occurs
> 2) a simple majority vote, in person or by e-mail for who will
> be Pres and VP.
good idea ...
what is the definition of simple majority ??? 51% or 67% ??
- i'm guessing 51%
another option ...
- those with the most vote is the pres
- those with the 2nd to the most vots is VP
> It should be announced in advance that a vote is happening
> at a particular meeting, and what the deadline for e-mail
> voting is.
it was already announced for days, weeks now ...
let these flame wars be notice that a vote of electing the
pres/vp is set for Feb 8 ..
- all votes by email should be sent in and received
no later than start of the svlug meeting ( 7:30p )
> 3) a simple majority vote on whether that person serves
> a) a full term
> b) the remainder of Paul's term
> c) some temporary term until the organization can
> draft proper bylaws and a more formal election can
> be held.
usual practice is the replacements fill the "current" term
and new elections as usual for the next "term"
- terms of the office is varied from 1yr to 2yr
and no clear winner ... it seems to depend on the "officer"
- also in the email archives
> 4) an independent counter of the vote decides the outcome
> I believe Edward said he would try to find someone for
volunteers at svlug.org would be an impartial counter
since we lack an official email addy like voting at svlug.org
show of hands at the meeting with several ( 3 - 5 ) people counting
and re-affirming each other is sufficient as has been the
case in the past
> 5) after the election, the work of the bylaws committee
> (or whatever it was called) should be made a priority. Some
> very simple rules (1 or 2 pages) would avoid a lot of
> misunderstandings, IMHO. I can't make it to meetings, but
> I will (with some degree of hesitation) volunteer to assist
> by e-mail in drafting bylaws if it would be helpful. I have
> done this for commercial standards organizations.
i'd add additional work for the new folks
- rebuild a new server ... its just a day or two of work
- update the mailing list ettiquette so tht it prevents off topic flamewars
- multiple people complaining dictates the thread is to be killed
- create "politics at svlug.org" for these political discussions
- also get svlug.org back to dnsmaster at svlug.org
as was voted a couple years ago that svlug reclaims its property
> Everyone's still a bit hot under the collar today, and I think
> a cooling off period would be good. I think a good approach
> would be to accept volunteers or nominations until the next
> meeting, and accept votes cast by e-mail until then, and
> then hold a short in-person vote at the meeting itself.
and maybe even have a 2minute talk of why they should get the vote
> By the end of the meeting, we could have some officers with
> a semblance of legitimate authority.
"authority" is not the issue
- "do-acracry" as paul likes to call it is the problem
and the additional problem is somebody else having a
"trump card" which screws things up ... which never
had these problems before ... there was nomention
of "authority" to do this or that .. it just got done
after volunteers volunteered to do the tasks
> That's just my own ideas and suggestions. I'm just an e-mail
> list subscriber with an interest in the group. I have no
> authority to implement any of the above,
yes you do have authority as does everybody in the svlug list
- take charge of it ... clean it up ...
- "vote" !!!
> but an interest
> is seeing a positive outcome for the organization.
we're all gonna watch and wait and see how it goes over
the next few months
More information about the svlug