[Osmf-talk] Change deadlines and add questionnaire for OSMF board elections

[Simon Poole]

The other thing I don't like about the current procedure is that is
massively disadvantages candidates that come forward and answer the
questions early and rewards those that tactically delay standing to the
last moment.

I would suggest that a staged approach in which we have a) a deadline
for standing b) a  later deadline by which candidates have to submit
their answers to a set of standard questions as you suggest and a
manifesto to whoever is running the election and then a simultaneous
publication of the answers.

Naturally that takes away part of the fun, so I think some kind of 
interactive session with all the candidates would have to be part of
such a change.

Simon

PS: btw, term limits?


Am 09.10.2018 um 09:11 schrieb Michael Reichert:
> Hi,
>
> October started a few days ago and the next OSMF board elections are not
> that far away. While thinking which questions to ask the candidates this
> year, I wondered how our board elections could be improved. People have
> pointed out two issues (and maybe more but I think these are easy to
> solve and the two most important from my point of view):
>
> (1) There are MANY emails to the OSMF-Talk list in a short time.
> (2) People ask to much questions. Mikel Maron described the issue like this:
> On 14 November 2017 11:47 Mikel Maron wrote on
> Talk:Foundation/AGM17/Election_to_Board:
>> I think we have outgrown this format of asking questions of board
>> candidates. With over 800 OSMF members, I don't see how we could use
>> this format to collect and sort out all the possible questions, in a
>> way that doesn't completely overload the candidates and the members.
>> At the very least, we need to limit the number of questions posed by
>> individual members, so that everyone has an opportunity. Even better
>> would be to move to another format, like an AMA, or a series of live
>> chats.
> IMHO, both issues could be solved – at least partially.
>
> (1) Change deadlines
>
> We have had following schedule for the last few years:
>
> 2 weeks before AGM: deadline for members to put themselves forward
> 1 week before AGM: voting starts
> start of AGM: end of voting
>
> This schedule forces many discussions among the members on the OSMF-Talk
> mailing list to happen in a short time and sets the candidates under
> pressure to answer many questions within the short time. That's why I
> propose following changed schedule:
>
> 4 weeks before AGM: deadline for members to put themselves forward
> 1 week before AGM: voting starts
> start of AGM: end of voting
>
> I hope that this spreads 400 emails over three to four weeks than one
> single week.
>
>
> (2) Questionnaire
>
> I think that moving the deadline for candidates to put themselves
> forward by two weeks gives the candidates more time to answer questions.
> (I hope that interesting questions are asked early)
>
> From my point of view, replacing the written solution by oral or a
> proprietary one, is not the right way to do. Any oral comes with
> accessibility issues for non-native English speakers and people with
> impaired hearing or a low-bandwidth internet connection. A platform like
> Reddit requires members to agree to its terms of service. The platform
> should be hosted by the foundation and members should not be forced to
> agree to any terms beyond those to access osm.org.
>
> But instead investing time and energy into a software solution which is
> used only once a year, we could try a simpler solution first. Let's set
> up a questionnaire (you might call it "application form") all candidates
> have to fill out.
>
> The form should ask following questions:
>
> - name
> - nationality
> - country of residence
> - OSM user account(s)
> - activity in OSMF working groups
> - activity in local chapters
> - languages spoken
> - business relations with OSM
> - your manifesto
>
> This questionnaire covers most questions which are asked every year and
> are not related to any "fashion", trend or ask for an opinion.
>
> The questionnaire should be a template (not a MediaWiki template but
> more a text to copy and paste [1]) and each candidate should put the
> filled out questionnaire on their wiki user page or a subpage thereof.
>
> Such a questionnaire also helps members to compare candidates more easily.
>
> Best regards
>
> Michael
>
>
> [1] Experience with MediaWiki templates should not be a requirement to
> stand up for the board. ;-)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20181009/f74d7178/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20181009/f74d7178/attachment.sig>