Well said Karen.

Having to ‘convince the majority’ of the NomCom is having a mini-election prior to the membership voting. NomCom’s process should be changed to removing people who are clearly unqualified, (like if I ran, they should cut me) and that’s it.

By the way Tom (& the rest of the Board), the Elections page is great, well done on that front!

I think there may be something amiss with our process if this is the goal:

“if you put forward a person’s name as a candidate then you do so with the assumption that they will be elected. ”

I think the best role for a nomcom is to screen those, who if elected, would be functional team members on the Board. So it would be perfectly fine for there to be 40 candidates for 3 slots. I don’t believe the role should be to whittle down the candidates to a list of elected people, or anything close to that.

In fact, I hate voting on elections where it is a one for one match of candidates to positions due to a committee selecting the candidates.

It appears to me that the NomCom in this go round did follow the process as it is is defined, but that the process and the rules still have room for improvement.