[Discussion][BYLAW] New Rules for Handling Open Roles in Elections

[Lane Staples]

Currently, our rules and process for elections assume that at least one willing and able candidate will be available for every role in every election cycle; however, that is not always the case.

The precedence we've adopted has been to move forward without a vote, allowing roles to remain empty, when insufficient candidates are available for a term.

To make sure that our election timelines stay on track, we'd like to formalize how we handle these situations in future.

Please, add your feedback / discussion in reply to this email.

Discussion will remain open for a minimum of two weeks before a vote is called.

Thanks all,

Lane

[Korvin Szanto]

Thank you for raising this discussion Lane!

I have the following suggestions:

- We do what Larry has been suggesting for a while and reduce the number of core committee members we have. Perhaps we can use vacancies as an easy way to get to a more stable number
- If there are not enough nominated candidates to fill seats, we extend the nomination period by two weeks and announce the failure to fill as a way to hopefully garner more nominations and bring the issue to the forefront. Maybe we repeat this a couple times before calling a vote.

- If we still end up not having enough nominations, we move forward with a vote and expect the unfilled seats to be vacant until a special election can be called to fill them after a set period, maybe 6 months.
- If we don't have contested seats we still hold a vote. At the very least this gives the electorate an opportunity to be active.
- If any candidate should get 0 votes, they are not elected and the seat they were nominated for becomes vacant. This grants the electorate an opportunity to deny a nominated person in case something disqualifying is found and allows us to avoid the painful expulsion process.

Thanks again,

Korvin

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/cf8032d8-9855-4c88-a063-5858ef8cb863n%40googlegroups.com.

[Navarr Barnier]

I like all of Korvin's ideas.  I might suggest that the nomination period can only be extended once.  I don't think we'd want that to be an indefinite process, nor a process that is prone to subjectivity.

Ensuring the electorate is active is also a really great move. Participation is key, and ensuring participation even during lulls might empower or remind the electorate to be more active.

[Larry Garfield]

On Mon, May 26, 2025, at 8:11 PM, Korvin Szanto wrote:
> Thank you for raising this discussion Lane!
>
> I have the following suggestions:
>
> - We do what Larry has been suggesting for a while and reduce the
> number of core committee members we have. Perhaps we can use vacancies
> as an easy way to get to a more stable number

I naturally agree here. :-) We can reduce the number of seats to 9 by just only having a 3-seat elections from now on, and as terms roll off we scale down to 9.

> - If there are not enough nominated candidates to fill seats, we extend
> the nomination period by two weeks and announce the failure to fill as
> a way to hopefully garner more nominations and bring the issue to the
> forefront. Maybe we repeat this a couple times before calling a vote.

Putting a single extension in the bylaws makes sense. I agree it shouldn't be indefinite, or we end up just being kinda sad...

> - If we still end up not having enough nominations, we move forward
> with a vote and expect the unfilled seats to be vacant until a special
> election can be called to fill them after a set period, maybe 6 months.

There's an election every 8 month already, so I'd say we just treat it as a vacancy in the next election, for which we already have a clear process.

> - If we don't have contested seats we still hold a vote. At the very
> least this gives the electorate an opportunity to be active.

I've been fine with not holding the vote in uncontested elections historically, however, this is a good point about giving non-WG-members something to do, even if it's trivial. I would be OK with this if others are.

> - If any candidate should get 0 votes, they are not elected and the
> seat they were nominated for becomes vacant. This grants the electorate
> an opportunity to deny a nominated person in case something
> disqualifying is found and allows us to avoid the painful expulsion
> process.

Given that we're using STV/Proportional RCV, someone getting 0 votes in a contested election is very unlikely. It would require basically everyone to rank that person last. If even one person ranks them not-last, they are likely to end up with at least a fraction of a vote. It's actually kinda hard to get no votes in our election model. :-) (Though that's not a knock on the election model.)

--Larry Garfield

[Korvin Szanto]

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/5ef5dd3c-f785-425b-8804-b74f92299658%40app.fastmail.com.

Not quite, STV doesn't require a vote for each candidate so folks would just omit a candidate they'd prefer didn't get a seat when they vote. 

I totally agree that this will likely never happen, but I'd argue that we should avoid putting ourselves in a position where we seat a CC member or secretary that didn't receive a single vote. 

[Matteo Beccati]

Hi Korvin,

On 28/05/2025 16:36, Korvin Szanto wrote:
> Not quite, STV doesn't require a vote for each candidate so folks would
> just omit a candidate they'd prefer didn't get a seat when they vote.
>
> I totally agree that this will likely never happen, but I'd argue that
> we should avoid putting ourselves in a position where we seat a CC
> member or secretary that didn't receive a single vote.

Makes sense, indeed


Cheers
--
Matteo Beccati

Development & Consulting - http://www.beccati.com/

[FIDELE LUKEKA]

Subject: Re: Formalizing Approach to Uncontested or Unfilled Election Roles

Hi Lane,

Thank you for raising this important point.

I agree that it’s prudent to formalize how we handle situations where roles remain uncontested or unfilled. While allowing positions to remain vacant ensures that we don’t force unsuitable or unwilling candidates into roles, it can also impact continuity and operational effectiveness if key positions stay empty for extended periods.

Here are a few thoughts to consider:

1. Interim Appointments: Would it be possible to allow for interim appointments (perhaps by the current leadership or a designated committee) for critical roles until a suitable candidate can be found or another election cycle is held?

2. Recruitment Support: Could we introduce a proactive candidate outreach or mentorship process to encourage participation, especially in roles that tend to attract fewer candidates?

3. Transparent Communication: If a role remains unfilled, it may be useful to formally notify the community with an explanation and, if relevant, a plan for redistributing responsibilities or revisiting the role’s structure.

4. Documenting Precedence: Since we've already adopted this approach informally, clearly documenting it in our charter or election guidelines would definitely help set expectations and reduce ambiguity.

I’d be happy to contribute to drafting or reviewing language for this policy if helpful.

Looking forward to hearing others’ perspectives as well.

Best regards,
Fidèle Lukeka Kibasomba

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/044314fd-3c7e-4011-a161-33ce7d7a3f38%40beccati.com.

[Larry Garfield]

On Wed, May 28, 2025, at 11:47 AM, FIDELE LUKEKA wrote:
> *Subject:* Re: Formalizing Approach to Uncontested or Unfilled Election Roles

>
> Hi Lane,
>
> Thank you for raising this important point.
>
> I agree that it’s prudent to formalize how we handle situations where
> roles remain uncontested or unfilled. While allowing positions to
> remain vacant ensures that we don’t force unsuitable or unwilling
> candidates into roles, it can also impact continuity and operational
> effectiveness if key positions stay empty for extended periods.
>
> Here are a few thoughts to consider:
>

> 1. *Interim Appointments:* Would it be possible to allow for interim

> appointments (perhaps by the current leadership or a designated
> committee) for critical roles until a suitable candidate can be found
> or another election cycle is held?

The problem here is finding someone willing to take the job. If we had that, the election would already have selected them.

Mid-term vacancies already have an established process.

> 2. *Recruitment Support:* Could we introduce a proactive candidate

> outreach or mentorship process to encourage participation, especially
> in roles that tend to attract fewer candidates?

There's really only 2 elected roles: Secretary and Core Committee. One purpose of having 3 overlapping cohorts elected is so that the junior people can be mentored as needed by the senior ones. The challenge is getting someone in the door in the first place, which I think has more to do with FIG's public perception thanks to Laravel and Symfony (the 800 lb gorillas of PHP) not caring anymore. :-(

> 4. *Documenting Precedence:* Since we've already adopted this approach

> informally, clearly documenting it in our charter or election
> guidelines would definitely help set expectations and reduce ambiguity.

Yes, whatever we end up with here, whether it follows what we've done in this case historically or not, will end up as a bylaw change with bylaw vote.

--Larry Garfield