The major problem — one of the major problems, for there are several — one of the many major problems with governing people is that of who you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.

To summarize:- It is a well known and much lamented fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.

It's election time, as Debian Developer I get to chose who is going to be the Debian Project Leader for the next year - but I don't really care. If we can't get a naturally strong leader, then I don't think it matters at all. A naturally strong leader is one who actually leads and do so by strong consensus instead of just wanting to rule. For a naturally strong leader the election is a mere formality and he will run virtually unopposed.

So my vote is:

- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
[ 1 ] Choice 1: Wouter Verhelst
[ 1 ] Choice 2: Aigars Mahinovs
[ 1 ] Choice 3: Gustavo Franco
[ 1 ] Choice 4: Sam Hocevar
[ 1 ] Choice 5: Steve McIntyre
[ 1 ] Choice 6: Raphaël Hertzog
[ 1 ] Choice 7: Anthony Towns
[ 1 ] Choice 8: Simon Richter
[ 1 ] Choice 9: None Of The Above
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

What about "None of the Above" option? Isn't that excatly what I want? No, not really. I don't think we would be better of by not electing one of the candidates than we would by electing one of them. So "None of the Above" should be ranked equally with the others.

Why vote at all? I want to make a point, as feeble as it is, which is clearly different from just being lazy. I want to show by active participation that I don't think the election matters. Effectively a whatever option.

Now go grab some beer...