RationalWiki:2011 board of trustees election/Nominations

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Nominations are now closed

This is the page to nominate potential board members and for nominees to accept or reject their nomination. In order for a user to be nominated they must meet certain requirements:

  • Must be 18 years of age or older
  • Registered user for 1 year or longer on RationalWiki (Registered by January 10th, 2010)
  • 250 edits or more
  • At least 1 edit in the last 3 months

The nomination procedure is easy. Any user may nominate any number of users who meet the requirements, including themselves, by placing the user name in the nominee section. No second is required. Each nominee must accept the nomination or else they will not be eligible during the election.

Nominees may accept a nomination by adding their signature to it. Those who wish to decline nominations should strikeout the nomination with a brief note. Likewise, ineligible nominations should also be struckout.

Nominees should also "accept" their nominations to indicate their presence and awareness of this grand scheme.


The Board meets at least once per quarter, usually for about 60-90 minutes. The time demands are small, consisting mostly of the matter of approving the next quarter's budget and fundraiser. Really, it's boring. If you have a taste for Robert's Rules of Order and like taking notes, this is the perfect role for you.


To nominate link the user name:

To accept the nomination, indicate acceptance and then sign next to your user name:

An example rejection:

Nominees are encouraged to read the guide for board of trustees election before accepting or rejecting a nomination.


This year there are 3 positions open for election. Two positions are all ready filled by appointed board members Armondikov and Human.

List of nominees[edit]

Pending nominations[edit]



  • Ace McWicked...It would be an honour but I have a very busy next few months and wouldn't want to accept and not be able to do the job. That said though, I would more than happy next time around. As to Nuttys comment below, I don't know to what you are warning me of. Aceword up 02:50, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Blue It would be an honor, but I don't think I'll be able to devote the time that this position ought to have in the coming year. Blue Talk 23:20, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Kels I honestly don't believe I'm qualified, aside from the fact I'll have very little time to devote over the next several months. --Kels (talk) 04:37, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
  • JeevesMkII - Not especially interested in being on the board. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 09:08, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Radioactive afikomen Same reason as Blue. Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 05:42, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Nutty Roux reject - the nature of the personal threats made against me by a certain element of our opposition bent on destroying this site leaves me hesitant to disclose my real name on the annual report for the corporation, which is required of being a board member (Ace - read this). Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 19:05, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Psygremlin Respectfully decline. Mostly due to work commitments in the new year, partly to incompetence on my part and partly for the same reasons Nutty listed.
  • Totnesmartin Nice to be asked, even though I've left; however, I'm not willing to have my RL name on the innertubes. Totnesmartin (talk) 13:44, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
  • David Gerard I am brilliant, competent, flattered and use my real name. I'm also way busy with intermittent pounding bat sodomy from real life. And we have competent nominees already. I'll stick my head out if there's no-one else - David Gerard (talk) 11:47, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
    (David is now officially RW's Sarah Palin.) DickTurpis (talk) 03:05, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
  • P-Foster Just back from a long wiki-break, and still have a lot on my plate. Perhaps next time.
  • SusanG (won't be around?)
  • Nx
  • Phantom Hoover I don't meet the age requirement, for one thing.
  • Weaseloid - Declined due to indecision & commitment issues. Would probably be willing to step into the breach if needed. I'm not sure if I'm being vague enough here. WëäŝëïöïďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 21:17, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Concernedresident Thanks, but my work now makes it difficult to be as consistent as I'd like. If need be I can do this, but I think there are more reliable and consistent people around.
  • Sid Flattered, but no. I'm not even around enough to keep track of WIGO:CP, and this year will be a busy one, too. --Sid (talk) 00:24, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
  • LArron Ditto, thanks Vandal (???) for the nomination, but though it it a worthwhile task, I won't have time for it over the next couple of months. larronsicut fur in nocte 20:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Π Whilst I would like to, I won't have the time over the next year to be able to over the next year. - π 21:10, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Genghis Khant I would like to accept the nomination but don't feel that I can currently commit to the requisite time in the coming year. However, I have confidence in the abilities of the present members and current candidates and feel that they will be able to do a good job. Redchuck.gif Генгисmarauding 23:11, 9 January 2011 (UTC)