Re: [alac] Revision of internal positions

[Vittorio Bertola <vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Il giorno mar, 21/02/2006 alle 00.36 +0330, shahshah@xxxxxxxx ha
scritto:
> Vittorio,
> Assuming this [Chair+2ViceChairs] formula is now accepted(it wasn't my
> favorite, but I can live with it), let us not risk possible lack of public
> harmony by electing independent candidates to these positions. After all,
> the Chair should still be the public face of the Committee and you would
> not want public quarrels between the Chair and one of the Vice Chairs. I
> propose we adopt one of the following methods:
> Method 1. We first choose a Chair. The the Chair will nominate one or more
> candidates he/she has come to an understanding with for each Vice Chair
> position. The Committee then votes for the Vice Chairs.
> Method 2. You ask for nominations for 3-member teams(with specified
> positions). Then the Committee members vote for the team they prefer. It
> should be understood that the team members have reached an understanding
> among themselves on how they're going to work together.
> I'm personally inclined toward Method 1, but I'd like to hear other opinions.

I did not want to make this too complex, and I would be afraid of method
2, which, requiring people to agree on groups of candidates, could
effectively give way to a "majority" and "minority" in the Committee. In
this case I would rather prefer to have people of different opinion in
the various positions, but that's a personal preference.
In any case, perhaps it's reasonable to first appoint the Chair and then
run a second separate process for the vice Chairs, according to the
result. Do other people have preferences on this matter?
-- 
vb.             [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<-----
http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Prima o poi...