[Members] Metaproposals 3 and 4 - Council Candidate Limitations and Appointment Appeals

[Alexey Melnikov]

Artur Hefczyc wrote:

> On 8 Oct 2009, at 13:26, Fabio Forno wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Dave Cridland <dave at cridland.net>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> If you *do* want to impose limits, you'll need to do them on the  
>>> basis of
>>> canidature and not election, therefore, and I suspect that there's  
>>> a risk of
>>> imposing so many limits that we lose out. I personally think there  
>>> are times
>>> when the best Council achievable from the candidates standing is  quite
>>> likely to have multiple people from the same company.
>>
>> It depends on many things, sometimes it is also better to have as many
>> points of view as possible. However there is a strong limit that I
>> would impose on election: no more than majority minus one from the
>> same organization (then the difficult is to define organization, since
>> companies are different than open source projects)
>
> I do not understand why we really need such a limits.

To be frank I am at the moment undecided about limits. Or rather I keep 
changing my opinion. However:

> Why not let the people (members) decide who they want to vote for?
> People who vote know or should know that some candidates are from the
> same company/organisation or whatever. If they feel like this might be
> a problem they can simple chose not to vote for some candidates.

+1.
This is exactly what I did - I voted against some people on the council 
on the basis that they represent the same entity.

> I am against forcing this kind of limitations as long as voting  
> members know
> that candidates are from the same company. This is, however information
> which should be available in the candidate description.

Right.