On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 12:00:30AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Quoting Constitution section 5.2:
Quoting the same section :-)
2. The election begins nine weeks before the leadership post becomes
vacant, or (if it is too late already) immediately.
8. The Project Leader serves for one year from their election.
I think it's fairly clear that the office remains vacant during repeated
elections.
> Alternatively, if the office is already vacant due to resignation,
> recall by the Developers, or other incident, those who feel we shouldn't
> have a Leader at all can buy the decapitation of the Project nine weeks
> at a time. :)
If a significant fraction of developers feel that not having a leader
is preferable to appointing any of the candidates on the ballot, then
they should be able to vote that way, and I think it is unwise to
actually choose one of the candidates as a winner in such a case.
Similarly, if most developers vote for just one candidate and rank
the rest under the default option, then this indicates a major schism
in the project, one that would only be worsened by selecting a winner
that the majority of the project feels so negatively about.
In summary, I think that leaving the office vacant is in fact a
reasonable default option, and it is the safest option if None Of The
Above is part of a circular tie.
Richard Braakman
