| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tim Courtney wrote:
>
> > Cool. Anyone else care to add their .02?
>
> I feel voting for LSC members should be open to the general group. I've
> got 2 reasons for this:
>
> 1. I trust people enough that they'll deal with their own capabilities
> for discernment in this area.
> 2. I don't want to have to sort out who gets to vote, and who doesn't.
> I'm guessing there are people who are qualified to select the LSC
> members, even though they might not fit the outline we've described for
> eligibility.
I see your points and agree with 2 and 3, but only partially with 1.
Anyways, there's about equal response for or against limitations. Not
totally sure on what to do - I'll let it simmer for a bit.
(I should note that if there was no limitation on who could vote for the LSC
members, I would be able to vote, and if there were, I would not)
-Tim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tim Courtney writes:
> (I should note that if there was no limitation on who could vote for the LSC
> members, I would be able to vote, and if there were, I would not)
I would rephrase that... under the most prevalent current limitation scheme
being floated, (LSC eligible==LSC voting eligible) you would not be able to,
and I would barely squeak by. Certainly other schemes could be floated, with
different qualifications for voting than for LSC membership, that would have
that not be true, or even reversed.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tim Courtney wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss writes:
> > In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tim Courtney wrote:
> >
> > > Cool. Anyone else care to add their .02?
> >
> > I feel voting for LSC members should be open to the general group. I've
> > got 2 reasons for this:
> >
> > 1. I trust people enough that they'll deal with their own capabilities
> > for discernment in this area.
> > 2. I don't want to have to sort out who gets to vote, and who doesn't.
> > I'm guessing there are people who are qualified to select the LSC
> > members, even though they might not fit the outline we've described for
> > eligibility.
>
> I see your points and agree with 2 and 3, but only partially with 1.
>
> Anyways, there's about equal response for or against limitations. Not
> totally sure on what to do - I'll let it simmer for a bit.
Well, it's simmered a bit. There's been no outcry one way or another. I think
for simplicity's sake, the proposal should change to allow anyone to vote for
who is on the LSC, not just those who are LSC eligible. I don't think the stakes
are high enough to need that measure, given the current climate of the
community.
Does anyone agree? Does anyone object?
> (I should note that if there was no limitation on who could vote for the LSC
> members, I would be able to vote, and if there were, I would not)
And ... as noted, this does gain me a vote where I wouldn't have had one.
-Tim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tim Courtney wrote:
> Well, it's simmered a bit. There's been no outcry one way or another. I think
> for simplicity's sake, the proposal should change to allow anyone to vote for
> who is on the LSC, not just those who are LSC eligible. I don't think the stakes
> are high enough to need that measure, given the current climate of the
> community.
>
> Does anyone agree? Does anyone object?
I agree. Everyone should be able to vote.
> > (I should note that if there was no limitation on who could vote for the LSC
> > members, I would be able to vote, and if there were, I would not)
>
> And ... as noted, this does gain me a vote where I wouldn't have had one.
Well, I think we could make an exception to the rule on this point ...
;)
Steve
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tim Courtney wrote:
>
> > Well, it's simmered a bit. There's been no outcry one way or another. I think
> > for simplicity's sake, the proposal should change to allow anyone to vote for
> > who is on the LSC, not just those who are LSC eligible. I don't think the stakes
> > are high enough to need that measure, given the current climate of the
> > community.
> >
> > Does anyone agree? Does anyone object?
>
> I agree. Everyone should be able to vote.
Assuming they comply with the base self selection criteria for LDraw.org
membership.
>
> > > (I should note that if there was no limitation on who could vote for the LSC
> > > members, I would be able to vote, and if there were, I would not)
> >
> > And ... as noted, this does gain me a vote where I wouldn't have had one.
>
> Well, I think we could make an exception to the rule on this point ...
> ;)
Exceptions to rules are a dangerous precedent to set, even when (as in this
case) they are done with the best of intentions. :-)
> Steve
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss wrote:
> > I agree. Everyone should be able to vote.
>
> Assuming they comply with the base self selection criteria for LDraw.org
> membership.
Of course.
> > Well, I think we could make an exception to the rule on this point ...
> > ;)
>
> Exceptions to rules are a dangerous precedent to set, even when (as in this
> case) they are done with the best of intentions. :-)
LOL :P
-Tim
|
|
|
