Is this accurate or only partially accurate? It states a fact but when stepping back a few more paces to grasp the larger picture we see that membership votes for those they want in office, of those names on the ballot.

While it is true others could be nominated, it is not as simple as saying it can be done.

Look at voter turnout, look at the people running. Those two things are perhaps best described as woefully low and very limited in choice, respectively. I know several of the people that ran and that were elected. Some for more than a decade. That aside, there is an absolute lack of positive encouragement to get general membership to stand for the positions. If the TalkBoard positions were as widely advertised as the various “Reporter seeking such and such type of traveler” stickies, I believe we would have a much broader base of voters and a more differentiated list of candidates. Which is in my opinion a good goal for a board of this size.

I would support this motion because it is my belief that fresh blood (or more specifically an artificial replacement of previous position holders) is going to lead to FT needing to be more proactive in engaging membership for the roles being vacated. This would be an altogether good thing. Imagine representation by variety of interested parties over time and the diverse conversations and positions that would be represented. Heck it might even resemble what the American government was designed to be way back when.

Mike