A response to Lou Antonelli's single-word platform of "diversity":
Lou, given that the word diversity is usually used to talk about people's identities along axes of oppression--to talk about the fact that white men are usually the majority and people who aren't white men are usually underrepresented--can you understand why it's offensive to me when you indicate that I don't bring any "diversity of outlook" to the board?
I understand that you may not be particularly aware of a lot of my attributes. You may not know I'm ethnically Jewish or that I'm the only person under 30 running for one of the four "executive" posts. You don't know that I'm queer. It's okay that you don't know these things, but the way you've framed your campaign implies that they either don't exist or that they don't matter.
Lumping me in with John and Mary--and they're wonderful! but they're not my identical twins--erases a number of facets of my person and my fullness as a human being. It erases a lot of theirs, too.
You may be the only Baptist, but as far as I know, I'm the only queer person (ETA: running for an executive position). You may be different as a writer because you're the person with the fewest sales, but I'm different as a writer because I'm the person with the most experience of writing within literary and experimental communities. We both bring perspectives that other candidates don't share. The way you're framing your candidacy as one that increases diversity, and explicitly stating that mine is one that doesn't, is inaccurate.