Kynn wrote:
>At 03:20 a.m. 01/12/98 +0100, eva wrote:
>>According to the archives and other documents some of you didn't
>>make any contribution to the Guild whatsoever. I hope you understand my
>>concern.

>Although I'm personally sympathetic to this point of view,
>the problem does remain that participation in mailing lists
>or volunteer problems is not the _only_ way one can demon-
>strate the ability to lead the Guild or do the job of a
>Governing Board member; the skills necessary to be a good
>list guide or list contributor don't necessarily map directly
>to the skills needed for the Board.

You are not trying to invent a wheel again, are you? ;) Of course different
tasks require different skills. Furthermore, the quantity alone doesn't have
much value if the quality is poor. Still, one has to start somewhere - and
previous involvement in the Guild's operations seemed to be like a good
place to start.

>I extend that to all volunteers and even active
>participants; does someone's willingness to answer HTML
>questions necessarily make her a good choice for the board
>of this corporation?

Of course not. I would nonetheless gave them some bonus points for their
involvement and should two candidates have equal qualifications I'd choose
one "answering questions"

>On the other hand, there's no _obvious_ way to tell how
>someone will do, unless they're actually in the position
>themselves.  Only one of the current candidates fits that
>category -- and he's done an _exceptional_ job as a Board
>member, from my perspectives -- so it's hard to judge just
>how well someone who is a "stranger" will do.

Right. As this is first time the election campaigning is taking place and no
charter for this list has been written I take the above paragraph as an ok
for us, the voters, to promote our favorites?
/e

HWG: hwg-elections mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA