Return to self-nomination Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: cory
Date/Time: Fri, June 2, 2000 at 4:13 AM GMT (Fri, June 2, 2000 at 12:13 AM EDT)
Browser: Netscape Communicator V4.72 using Windows NT
Score: 5
Subject: The term "self-nomination" and what it means.

Message:
 

 
>>>1.  People who are nominated outside the Nominating Committee's
>>>should be called public candidates, not self-nominees.  The
>>>"self-nominee" designation is degrading and a misnomer of the process
>>>by which one gets on the ballot through this alternative to the
>>>Nomination Committee slate.

>>I fail to see how calling a person a "self-nominee" is degrading. It >>means that the person put themselves up for nomination - which is >>_exactly_ what is happening here. How is it degrading?

>>At most one can say that one isn't "really" a nominee until one is >>on the ballot, but that is being officious and picking nits, IMNSHO.
     
>First of all, I agree that the term "self nominee" is degrading.  It
>makes the nominee look and feel as though he/she is tooting his/her
>own horn and could not be nominated in any other way.

I disagree. It seems to me like you're assuming that this horn tooting  is by default going to be pure arrogance, and that is a wrong assumption. After all, if a nominee doesn't toot their own horn nobody is going to why they are qualified or even that theyare there at all. Saying "This is why I would make a good director" can be done without being arrogant.

>Second, why should that be the only case for public nominations?
>Usually, nominees come from the general membership and are seconded.
>I should think that self nomination AND nomination by members should
>be allowed, plus only a second should be needed to place the nominee
>on the ballot.  The nominee can always decline the nomination.

Are you saying that there should only be 2 people (nominator & seconder) required to get a name on to the actual ballot? Can you imagine how clogged the list would be, then, from which we'd have to chose to vote? Potentially _hundreds_ of names could be on the ballot!  As the present system stands for self-nominations (and not being concerned, for the moment, with advantages to NomCom nominees), I think it is a good one, with only minimal changes needing to be made WRT minimal number of countries from which support for a nominee must come to get on the ballot (se my posts on the elsewhere) and a longer nominating period.

 


Message Thread:


Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy