[Linux-aus] Nomination for Council Member / Treasurer
noel.butler at ausics.net
Sat Dec 20 15:48:00 EST 2014
Sure, when standing for elections it's to their own advantage to tell us
what they want to about themselves, but they shouldn't need to declare
anything, who they work for, or who their colleagues are, nor should I
have the right to demand this incase one of them doesn't think too
highly of LA, for all we know, David may disagree with what Sam wrote,
nobody bothered to ask him AFAIK, and he also has the right not to
answer that to avoid workplace conflict, certain people just want to
execute him based on an association, and that's just plain out wrong no
mater how you look at it.
For example, I'm sure no one here thinks much if anything of telstra or
the big banks, so that might end the chances of someone here who works
for one of them, most people detest politicians because they work for
their party - not the constituents, so someone might declare they work
in a level of govt - even in IT (well its still "employer association"),
ok, there goes their chances of council... so where will it end?
On 20/12/2014 13:08, Neill Cox wrote:
> I agree that people should be able to comment freely without having to declare their affiliations. When they stand for an important council position it's a bit different though.
> At that point I think all candidates should provide us with enough context to make an informed voting decision. I'm certainly more likely to vote for someone who I know a bit about than someone who is a complete cipher.
> Note that I'm not speaking about David specifically. I like to know a bit about all of the candidates.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the linux-aus