On 10/16/07, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/16/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
That's what I was thinking when I was considering standing in the last elections (I decided not to, which was the right decision, I think - maybe this time... we'll see) - I didn't really expect to last more than a year, and didn't think it would be a problem to serve for a year and step down at the next election. Less than a year, and I would have felt like I was letting down the people who voted for me (if there had been any, which I doubt - I wasn't ready, and I doubt I could have fooled people into thinking I was), but a year is long enough, I think.
I do agree that an arbitrator should not consider it a failure, or a letdown of one's supporters, to announce retirement after the next election and opening up a space for someone else.
-Matt
I would consider it a sign of maturity and long term committment to the project if any senior project member takes an intentional sanity break from stressful duties, with an eye towards avoiding total burnout and returning (in the same, or different roles) later.
I would almost argue for "run for a shorter term, can't run again until you've had a year off", but I'm not sure I would want to legislate specific time limits for anyone who has the energy and bandwidth and really grooves on the job.