On Mon, 2007-29-01 at 14:01 -0600, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Ned Ludd wrote: [Mon Jan 29 2007, 09:50:28AM CST]
> > > Then it should be offered to the 8th person, at which point either
> > > he/she will then refuse the nomination and it's offered to the 9th.
> > > Rinse and repeat.
> > > If we run out
Ned Ludd wrote: [Mon Jan 29 2007, 09:50:28AM CST]
> > Then it should be offered to the 8th person, at which point either
> > he/she will then refuse the nomination and it's offered to the 9th.
> > Rinse and repeat.
> > If we run out of nominees then we'll need another election.
> >
>
> Agreed. #3
On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 14:46 +, Roy Marples wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:39:05 +0100
> "Rob C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > For what its worth, I think option #2 is the best.
> >
> > I think option #1 is out of the question and I think that #3 is flawed
> > because the 8th spot develope
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:39:05 +0100
"Rob C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For what its worth, I think option #2 is the best.
>
> I think option #1 is out of the question and I think that #3 is flawed
> because the 8th spot developer's situation or commitment to the
> project may have changed since
For what its worth, I think option #2 is the best.
I think option #1 is out of the question and I think that #3 is flawed
because the 8th spot developer's situation or commitment to the project may
have changed since the last vote and in any case that developer would be
free to partake in the run
On Monday 29 of January 2007 12:46:33 Wernfried Haas wrote:
> 4. The position stays empty until the next election (As long the
>number of council members doesn't drop below a certain number,
>let's say 5.
I think we need odd no. of members to have a casting vote.
Btw. I vote for #3.
--
B
On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 02:24:49PM -0800, Mike Doty wrote:
> 1. re-elect a whole new council.
Seems to be overkill to me.
> 2. elect a new member at a reduced term to fill the vacancy.
Personally i'd rather go with #3, but the GLEP also states:
> If a council member who has been marked a slac
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Sunday 28 January 2007 17:24, Mike Doty wrote:
1. re-elect a whole new council.
2. elect a new member at a reduced term to fill the vacancy.
3. take the 8th spot from the last election.
i'd lean towards three here ... also, s/8th/next/ in case we shed more than 1
p
On Sunday 28 January 2007 17:24, Mike Doty wrote:
> The subject of what to do if a council member voluntarily leaves the
> council came up at the last meeting.
i dont think the "voluntarily" qualification should be there ... if a dev
turns jackass and they get punted and they happen to be on the
On Sun, 2007-28-01 at 14:24 -0800, Mike Doty wrote:
> The subject of what to do if a council member voluntarily leaves the
> council came up at the last meeting. The glep doesn't cover what to do
> in this case.
>
> Here are the options:
>
> 1. re-elect a whole new council.
> 2. elect a new me
The subject of what to do if a council member voluntarily leaves the
council came up at the last meeting. The glep doesn't cover what to do
in this case.
Here are the options:
1. re-elect a whole new council.
2. elect a new member at a reduced term to fill the vacancy.
3. take the 8th spot f
11 matches
Mail list logo
