Thread: [Council] Council_Update-July_2011
View Single Post
lma is offline lma
2011-07-25 , 08:00
Posts: 2,802 | Thanked: 4,491 times | Joined on Nov 2007
#236
Originally Posted by Jaffa View Post
I wouldn't say "acclaim" is the right word (in the most common meaning); maybe "selected because no-one else would get off their arse and volunteer [and thus give 6 or more candidates for 5 positions, meaning an election is required]".
I confess I briefly thought about it, but without a 7th candidate it would just cancel out the last one's (conditional) entry and at the end decided "better him than me". Gaming the system doesn't do any of us any favours.

Since it's brought up, I would like to propose (assuming there is a next time) that we close the loophole that allows a non-elected council. The spirit of the rules (as the page says at the top) is "The 5 council members will be elected by the community" so this seems more like an off-by-1 error than an intended case anyway. The simplest fix would be s/fewer/no more/ in:
Code:
10. If fewer than 5 candidates stand for election, the 3 with the most votes are elected to the council.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to lma For This Useful Post: