While the 10% rule may seem
a very difficult threshold in densely populated regions such as North America, it
is not a very profound barrier to nomination in more thinly populated or country-diverse
regions. Also, in areas such as North America, serious candidates should have
the internet and information management skills to marshall a considerable constituency
in the time frame permitted. Being able to do this, in fact, might be a sign
of considerable board-worthiness. My own objection to the 10% rule stems from
the fact that some candidates will come to the election with built-in constituences
from organisational affiliations -- still, setting the bar any lower would not exclude
these candidates, nor diminish their eventual voter base, but only ensure the presence
of a larger number of independent thinkers on the ballot. There's nothing to be lost
to such an outcome, but there's likely little to be gained since constituency bases
do exist already and will be a powerful presence during the election. Ultimately,
if the user constituency wants actual grassroots representation, we will have to
work for it regardless of the nomination system.
|
|
|