On 8/17/05, Jack Lynch <jack.i.lynch(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Maybe if adminship was determined my a long and
complementary process,
rather than an open vote (where you get to see the names of those who
oppose you), some of the bad blood would reduce.
Surely the corresponding reduction in transparency of the process
would simply lead to more people screaming "cabal"? I can see the
disadvantages of both, but I recognise that open voting can be a
hindrance when it comes to voting users voicing their discontent with
the candidate. When it's 49 votes in support, placing one vote in
opposition can be tough, especially as it can lead to animosity from
the supporting voters.
~Mark Ryan