[Osmf-talk] How to vote to match your view
penorman at mac.com
Sun Nov 30 23:58:48 UTC 2014
I'm taking a different approach than Frederik, and instead of
outlining my views on term limits, I'm outlining how to match your views
to what to vote on. I have my own views on term limits - on which I may
send another message later.
There are three items being voted on, SR1 which enacts term limits, SR2
which causes any enacted term limits to reset if you take a break from
the board of the same length as you had served, and OR1 which calls for
an election to be held in 45-90 days. OR1 is independent of SR1 and SR2.
# Term limits
If you oppose term limits, you should vote no to SR1 and yes to SR2. SR1
is obvious, but if term limits pass, SR2 would limit their effect. If
SR1 fails, this results in no changes in upcoming elections.
If you support term limits that do not reset, vote yes to SR1 and no to
SR2. The most well known example of term limits that do not reset are
the US presidential term limits. This results in minimal changes* for
who has to step down next election. It would impact who could run in the
upcoming election. Sarah has computed this.
If you support term limits, but don't want them to prohibit someone from
running for re-election indefinitely, vote yes to SR1 and SR2. This does
not change who has to step down, but would allow those noted in Sarah's
email to run for the upcoming election.
I do not see an obvious viewpoint which would lead to a vote of no to
both SR1 and SR2. This would correspond to a view that there shouldn't
be term limits, but if there are term limits, they shouldn't ever reset.
Term limits have been supported by Richard Weait, Frederik, Martin,
Marek, Kathleen, Steve Coast, Mikel, Johan, Randy, Ethan, and myself.
Term limits have been opposed by Oliver, Peter, and Henk.
# New election
The ordinary resolution is the only resolution which would influence the
board composition over the next 12 months. It does not change which
board members have to step down next election, nor does it change who
can run in the election, but it changes when it is. It could be used to
move the AGM schedule to fit better with the financial year.
The idea of a "reboot" was also raised multiple times last election, and
this gives members a chance to vote on it. It is not a complete reboot,
but will result in 2/3 of the board having been elected within the last
Support for a new election or "reboot" has been mixed and there have
been fewer clear statements on it.
* Henk would have to step down in either case as it has been three years
since election for him. If it results in other changes would depend on
who would have chosen to step down.
More information about the osmf-talk