[Foundation-l] Board election endorsements

[Erik Moeller]

I agree that removing and prohibiting endorsements before a candidate
has been confirmed is unnecessary; if the candidate is not confirmed
for some reason, those endorsements could simply have been ignored. At
the very least, the endorsement period needs to be extended by a few
days.

On 6/18/07, Robert Leverington <lcarsdata at googlemail.com> wrote:
> The fact that candidates cannot be endorsed until they have been
> confirmed is entirely wrong. As it is there is already little time for
> endorsements (especially for the later candidates) as endorsement is
> closed AT THE SAME TIME AS candidate presentations close and the
> confirmation is just making less and less time. It is also unfair that
> simply because a member of staff is not in the office candidates are
> unable to receive endorsements even though they have submitted there
> identity confirmation (although I do not resent Cary taking a day of
> vacation which he is entitled to).
>
> This years elections have been full of unnecessary bureaucracy.
> Especially in the attitude of the election committee. Therefore I
> propose that next year (or this year in fact as the current elections
> are a complete shambles) that there is a clear time line to make it
> fair for all candidates. I outline it here:
>
> * Candidate presentations and chance to ask questions
> * Endorsements and chance to ask questions
> * Vote
>
> None of these should overlap and if possible there should be a gap
> between them as an amnesty.
>
> Thank you for taking time to read this letter.
>
> --
> Robert
> http://roberthl.wikitest.co.uk/
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


-- 
Toward Peace, Love & Progress:
Erik

DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.