(just look at how many community members started contributing on a significant basis in 2009-present), and I don't think that's going to change.
You hope that stays the same.. Tim W just rocked the place with a bunch really great entries last night..
But that said Jonathan, as someone in the community for a long time, there are many many many others that could rock the place with their entries, that are still holding out, because they are NOT yet believers in what we do.. Just sayin..
Just checking. You implied Steve would have the IC job until he "retires", and while that may be the case, he does need to be nominated and elected every year, so its possible for him not to win an election.
My way of showing support for Steve currently, even though we have butted heads a few times..
And please continue to do so, your opinion is likely shared by others who remain silent. For me, I am willing to try and incorporate other opinions with mine to arrive at a compromise solution.
You do, do that it is noticed, and appreciated.. I have always said you and Kyle are an example to us all..
I think it is too soon to make a 3 year requirement. 2 years is ok.
I am still liking the one year, and if the IC is doing a good job, there is NO doubt we wouldn't reelect him/her.
Heck have we not reelected anyone at any level yet?
I'm sure the membership will vote for the most qualified candidate.
Not so sure, the most popular person, might trump the most qualified. Happens in ALL walks of life..
PS Anyway gentlemen, I concede my position for now, as I am in a extreme minority (alone I think
in my position) Carry on..