Candidacy FSFE Fellowship Representative

[Repentinus]

On 04/18/2016 01:16 PM, Joe Awni wrote:
> Are you suggesting that i am abusing you by pointing out that the
> results of an election with only one candidate are a foregone conclusion?

Concerning the low number of candidates, we at FSFE would prefer much
greater participation in the results. These elections are not the first
with only a single candidate nor are they likely to be the last. This is
suboptimal, but permitting candidates to put themselves forth at
arbitrary times is not the solution. Rather, the solution would be to
permit a no confidence vote in all candidates. If that proved to be the
winning option, the elections would be recalled for a date three months
in the future, allowing more people to put themselves forward. I will
propose the necessary constitutional amendment at the next general
assembly. However, we have to stick to the rules we have for now. I
understand this is frustrating, but it is equally frustrating for us as
we want the best Fellowship representatives we could have, which means
several candidates.



-- 
Heiki Lõhmus
Coordinator Translations
Free Software Foundation Europe
mailto:repentinus at fsfe.org
xmpp:repentinus at jabber.fsfe.org
http://blogs.fsfe.org/repentinus/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20160418/51f67673/attachment.sig>