Call for votes: Developer Membership Board restaffing

[Robie Basak]

On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 12:51:52PM +0100, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
> If you happen to activate the "wrong" email you'll just see:
> 
> ```
>   Email address successfully activated.
> ```
> 
> But if you activate the right one (just as Robie said, usually the
> @ubuntu.com one) you'd in the Web UI of CIVS right after clicking
> "Complete activation" see this:
> 
> ```
> Email address successfully activated.
>   Pending poll invitations:
>     Ubuntu Developer Membership Board restaffing
> ```
> 
> The latter line is a link leading you to your vote.

Thank you Christian for detailing this. Hopefully this has helped others
vote.

So far the turnout is considerably lower than the previous election two
years ago. Last time there were 54/173 votes cast at the time the poll
closed. For the CIVS poll in progress I can't see who voted (or how) but
the control page does show me the count. So far we have 23/174.

We've had a couple of hurdles:

1) This extra opt-in step means that the electorate no longer get the
poll request directly to their inbox. We're relying on them seeing the
ubuntu-devel-announce@ notifications, or subsequent traffic to
ubuntu-devel at .

2) Recently Gmail seems to have adjusted things which has caused
deliverability problems to @gmail.com addresses (and presumably other
addresses hosted by Google). IS has made some adjustments to try to
help, but it's unclear to me if they worked because overnight I received
~373 "unsubscribe" notifications to ubuntu-devel-owner@ all at once,
predominantely relating to @gmail.com addresses. It seems likely to me
that these are a result of the deliverability problems. So it's not
clear to me that all of the electorate is actually even aware of the
election. Of course there are surely many more ubuntu-devel@ subscribers
than those eligible to vote, so the number of unsubscribes doesn't
actually mean anything.

I'd appreciate feedback on how to proceed. For example, together with
some specific action to draw the attention of the electorate, I could
extend the voting period if that would be considered helpful.

On the other hand, it would be helpful to get the replacement DMB
members resolved as soon as possible. Perhaps the current vote count can
be considered enough to not make a big difference to the outcome, given
that there's no particular reason for bias in those that might not have
received the announcement?

Robie
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20220329/20ac7927/attachment.sig>