Difference between revisions of "Talk:2016 Board Elections"

From Pumping Station: One Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Numbers: rt 4172)
(Numbers)
Line 55: Line 55:
 
::I opened an RT to request this so that the request doesn't fall through the cracks. I cc'd you so that you can track progress. Does the board actually have to wait for an official request? That seems weird. Maybe the RT can count as an official request. They can ask the pro bono lawyers. Or maybe you were being sarcastic? Hopefully you are being sarcastic so that they don't have to wait for a reply from the lawyers. [[User:Skm|Skm]] ([[User talk:Skm|talk]]) 12:41, 24 January 2016 (CST)
 
::I opened an RT to request this so that the request doesn't fall through the cracks. I cc'd you so that you can track progress. Does the board actually have to wait for an official request? That seems weird. Maybe the RT can count as an official request. They can ask the pro bono lawyers. Or maybe you were being sarcastic? Hopefully you are being sarcastic so that they don't have to wait for a reply from the lawyers. [[User:Skm|Skm]] ([[User talk:Skm|talk]]) 12:41, 24 January 2016 (CST)
 
:::The RT number is 4172
 
:::The RT number is 4172
 +
::::I should have added "if I am ignored as usual" to my post of January 23. I'm patient enough to wait and see whether it will happen this time. Tthere's no good reason for the board not to provide basic election data like this. The appropriate response will be "we're on it" and to post the information within a reasonable time. [[User:Jason|Jason]] ([[User talk:Jason|talk]]) 14:24, 24 January 2016 (CST)

Revision as of 14:24, 24 January 2016

Thanks for the nomination, Justin, I do look forward to serving on the board soon. I would like to know a little more about the system at the space before taking a role as CTO. I would be willing to shoot for 2017 CTO if I can glean enough about the system from the ones in the know. --Lucas (talk) 08:59, 8 January 2016 (CST)

record of declined nominations

There should be a record of declined nominations for historical purposes Skm (talk) 10:18, 13 January 2016 (CST)

Declined Nominations

President

  • Michael Skilton - Declined!
  • Anna Yu - Declined!

Vice President

  • Andrew Camardella - Declined!
  • Jonathan Bisson - Declined!
  • Ananda Stevens - Declined!
  • Erica Tesla - Declined!
  • Eric Stein - Declined!
  • Will Garza - Declined!

Secretary

  • Lyn Cole - Declined!
  • Giovanni Arroyo - Ineligible!

Treasurer

  • Khoi Nguyen - Declined!
  • Kyle Bieneman - Declined!

Chief Technical Officer

  • Ron Olson - Declined!
  • Joao Santos - Declined!
  • Lucas Goossen- Declined!
  • Brantley Harris - Declined!

Public and Press Relations Director

  • Todd Allen - Declined!
  • Andy Richardson - Declined!
  • Carl Karsten - Declined!

Directors-at-Large

  • Dan Locks - Declined!
  • Everett Wilson - Declined!
  • Eric Beauchamp - Declined!
  • Greg Daneau - Declined!
  • Mark Stevens - Declined!
  • Eugene Liokumovich - Declined!
  • Szymon Sambor - Declined!
  • Simon Pyle - Accepted! Withdrawn
  • Sloan Lavery - Declined!

Numbers

Please post the number of votes cast and for whom for each position. Jason (talk) 11:41, 20 January 2016 (CST)

I see I'll need to request this information officially under the Illinois Not For Profit Corporation Act. Jason (talk) 10:26, 23 January 2016 (CST)
I opened an RT to request this so that the request doesn't fall through the cracks. I cc'd you so that you can track progress. Does the board actually have to wait for an official request? That seems weird. Maybe the RT can count as an official request. They can ask the pro bono lawyers. Or maybe you were being sarcastic? Hopefully you are being sarcastic so that they don't have to wait for a reply from the lawyers. Skm (talk) 12:41, 24 January 2016 (CST)
The RT number is 4172
I should have added "if I am ignored as usual" to my post of January 23. I'm patient enough to wait and see whether it will happen this time. Tthere's no good reason for the board not to provide basic election data like this. The appropriate response will be "we're on it" and to post the information within a reasonable time. Jason (talk) 14:24, 24 January 2016 (CST)