For those who loaded the page before you saw this post, note that I had to edit the post a little bit after the first posting because I hit "enter" on accident before the final wording tweaks.

Personal thoughts on the issue, as a Community member as opposed to elected Councilmember:

I myself think that, while Nokia has yet to sign off the DNS control and other assets to Hildon Foundation, we should avoid disrupting the Board more than it already has been. However, after that is all done and settled, I, if I was in the community looking at this situation, would want to have the election held right after that's done - if the people currently appointed do a good job and earned the Community's trust and respect, they will likely get re-elected. If they didn't, they likely won't.

In the long run, I would also like to see if we can pass an amendment to the bylaws that says that if either body (board or council, but especially Board) has more than 50% of the Directors resign, it triggers an automatic re-election. Whether or not I agree with Rob's current appointment choices (and I tentatively guess that they are good ones, but we'll see how it plays out), the idea that a single left-over Director can repopulate the Board entirely on their own is, frankly, something that should be worrisome for any entity that expects some semblance of democracy to prevail indefinitely in its organization.

More thoughts will be posted in response to whatever gets/got posted after this.