this raises the question if:
- (a minority in) the community picked a representative not in line with community values (in which case, the values could be amended given majority support, tho until then they would be expected to follow these values)
- the community considered the employment change unexpected, and would reconsider their earlier vote
i’m not sure we have much data there, for now. that said, at the time of candidacy Tom had seemed open about earlier similar positions. it would not necessarily surprise me if in this particular case we’d be at the first scenario then.
- Long-term focus and stability - if people want to choose different leaders, is this necessarily preferable?
- Knowledge continuity - could these not be covered by an informal advisory role?
- Protection against takeovers - what of the mechanism’s unintended potential to actually facilitate a take-over?