Clarify election officer eligibility requirements

## Issue

The [election mechanics document](https://github.com/chaoss/community/blob/main/elections/mechanics-GB.md#election-officers) states that election officers must be "eligible to vote." This requirement may be unnecessarily restrictive.

## Why allowing external election officers could be beneficial

- **Impartiality**: An officer who is not an eligible voter has no personal stake in the election outcome, which strengthens the perception of fairness.
- **Broader talent pool**: The requirement limits who can serve as an officer. Removing it would allow skilled community organizers or governance-experienced people to help run the election even if they don't meet voter eligibility criteria.
- **Separation of concerns**: The officer role is administrative (managing nominations, voter lists, exception requests, announcements, tallying results). It does not require voting rights.

That said, having _all_ officers be external may not be ideal either — some familiarity with the CHAOSS community and its contributors is important for verifying candidate eligibility, handling exception requests, and communicating effectively. A good balance would be to allow a mix: some officers who are active community members and some who are external.

## Suggested Action

Review and consider updating the eligibility requirements for election officers in `elections/mechanics-GB.md` to allow non-voters to serve as officers, while recommending that at least some officers are active community members.

Read the election officer section in elections/mechanics-GB.md, especially the eligibility-to-vote requirement. Confirm with maintainers whether non-voters may serve and whether a mix of community and external officers is the approved policy. Done means the document states the agreed eligibility requirements and recommendation clearly.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.