CA #1...and others of course...
Here are my thoughts on the voting process. Take them for what they are worth. I C&P'ed this from Rocklobster's post. Just some food for thought. Thanks for looking:
Perhaps it should be the first 10 Aye votes.?.? This might move a potential candidate to a "pending status" while we await further feedback. If there are no Nays or other issues, the pending person could be made a permanent member.?.?
Just a suggestion...I'm not too sure we want to start creating a hierarchy. My .02 is that a Canary Ass is a Canary Ass...what makes one CA's opinion more valuable than another's?
One other idea I'd like to present...Perhaps we should have a minimum time limit on membership...so that we can get an accurate idea of a potential candidates real position on things...I suggest that we require they be a member of GB for at least one year prior to membership with the Brethren.
Perhaps it should be the first 10 Aye votes.?.? This might move a potential candidate to a "pending status" while we await further feedback. If there are no Nays or other issues, the pending person could be made a permanent member.?.?
Just a suggestion...I'm not too sure we want to start creating a hierarchy. My .02 is that a Canary Ass is a Canary Ass...what makes one CA's opinion more valuable than another's?
One other idea I'd like to present...Perhaps we should have a minimum time limit on membership...so that we can get an accurate idea of a potential candidates real position on things...I suggest that we require they be a member of GB for at least one year prior to membership with the Brethren.
0
-
ECC;
I approve of the 'first ten votes'; This allows for members being out of pocket..and cleverly avoids the problem of ten people thinking that they are so much more important then anybody else.
I have reservations about the `minimum time'...some of the best we have were in the thick of things inside a couple weeks.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
1 comment