On 6/6/06, Anthere Anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
Outsiders will obviously be appointed. For community members, we roughly have 4 solutions
- board appoint people (benefit, we are more likely to get people with
the best skills compared with what we need. Drawback : see current criticism)
- community votes for people (Drawback : less chance to get great people
from minority languages or projects. Might miss some great choices.)
- community votes per group perhaps, board pick up in the outcome
(en.wiki arbitration type). (Drawback : board might be expected to pick up those with highest number of votes anyway)
- Board pre-selection, then community vote (Benefit : more likely to get
what is truely needed).
The forth method might reduce the work election officers have to do, too. And for reflecting the voice of community, it would work well enough. This way is very similar of promotional eligibility in my university where I was granted BA. There we had veto to the sole candidate for university president, and if he couldn't get the majority of voters, he would lose. So as for dean candidate. I haven't known anyone who complain around that during my student life except one professor who scorned us because of too low voting rate on a going-on election at that time ...