[Noisebridge-discuss] Consensus for board elections

[Andy Isaacson]

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 04:17:43PM -0800, John E wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Albert Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com>wrote:
> > Why don't we use consensus to determine who should be on the board
> > of directors? Consensus has been working for our other decisions.
> > What would be the downsides?
>
> After consensus, we could have an election with 5 "unopposed"
> candidates to satisfy the by-laws.

I think that our elections should strive to meet the "free and fair"
standard that international democratic election monitors test for.

An election in which candidates are vetted -- by any process, consensus
based or not -- does not meet those criteria.  Even moreso if the final
slate is running unopposed.

Basically, my attitude is, "if you're going to have an election, do it
right."  Though I don't feel that democracy (the dictatorship of the
majority) is appropriate for the governance of Noisebridge, in this
circumstance I strongly feel that the election should be something we
can defend in court if we need to.  And, to me it matters more that we
try to do The Right Thing and address substantive isseus, than to
legalistically thread the needle and meet the textual requirements while
ignoring the intent of the bylaws / California Corporate Code.

-andy