[AFS3-std] Re: Voting for the position of AFS3-standardization co-chair

[Andrew Deason]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 12:38:48 -0500
David Boyes <dboyes@sinenomine.net> wrote:

> > A failure to respond to a request from the community is an
> > indication to me that I shouldn't vote for the unresponsive nominee.
> > It has nothing to do with what is or is not required by the process.
> 
> I disagree. We're changing the rules mid-stream. 
> 
> Right now, there is no requirement for anyone to provide a statement.
> If someone does, then good for them, but we shouldn't penalize people
> for not making one if it isn't required by the process.

The only "penalty" is that Jeff won't vote for them; nowhere do I see
that Jeff is suggesting that such candidates would be disqualified or
anything like that. Jeff is just expressing a desire as a voter, as far
as I can read. It seems good that voters express such opinions, so
candidates know what the voters are specifically looking for, if
anything.

I don't envision myself caring about position statements, but if Jeff
does, then... good for him.

-- 
Andrew Deason
adeason@sinenomine.net