|
Grex > Coop11 > #146: Results of the 1999 Board Election | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 90 responses total. |
spooked
|
|
response 50 of 90:
| 
Dec 24 01:21 UTC 1999 |
hehe There are a lot of places out there which don't sensor things, though.
|
don
|
|
response 51 of 90:
|
Dec 24 01:46 UTC 1999 |
Not places that would have conferences open to minors that are specifically
about sexuality. Not places that would fight so hard to throw out that state
law against everything on grex.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 52 of 90:
|
Dec 24 02:11 UTC 1999 |
Well, I for one am glad we don't censor things either. But I thought there
were some sensors in the Pumpkin. ;-)
|
spooked
|
|
response 53 of 90:
|
Dec 24 02:14 UTC 1999 |
(=
|
scg
|
|
response 54 of 90:
|
Dec 24 05:22 UTC 1999 |
Limiting voting to paying members makes sense to me. It's an issue of those
of us who are paying to run this place determining how our money should be
spent.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 55 of 90:
|
Dec 24 05:45 UTC 1999 |
I'm not a member. I voted although I knew that my vote would not determine
the outcome of the election. I had not intended to vote, but then I saw
the comment that non-members' votes were counted for their curiousity value.
So I voted. :)
It makes sense to me that only members' votes affect the election. I don't
see a need to change.
|
don
|
|
response 56 of 90:
|
Dec 24 15:30 UTC 1999 |
Of those non-member votes: how many of them do you think were due to people
not knowing that their vote wouldn't count and trying to vote "for real"?
|
gelinas
|
|
response 57 of 90:
|
Dec 24 21:44 UTC 1999 |
I've no opinion. Maybe someone else does?
|
dpc
|
|
response 58 of 90:
|
Dec 27 01:49 UTC 1999 |
Congrats to the new Board members! And congrats also to the candidates
who got a *substantial* number of votes from people not Grex members.
Maybe mooncat's presence in "party" explains her level of support.
OTOH, maybe there was another political phenomenon inside the "soft
underbelly" of Grex...
And now - the big question: Which Board member is willing
to serve as Treasurer?
|
remmers
|
|
response 59 of 90:
|
Dec 27 17:20 UTC 1999 |
It's hard to say what the non-member votes mean. Probably a blend
of various things.
As the person who does the vote counting, I can say this: During
the counting process, I see the login id's of the people who voted
(although I don't see *how* they voted). There are always a large
number of non-member voters, and most of their login id's are
completely unfamiliar to me. So I think that a large portion of
the non-member voters don't participate in the conferences (let
alone coop) and are unfamiliar with the candidates and issues,
other than what they might glean from the candidates' statements
that the vote program displays. I suspect that there's a lot of
randomness in the non-member voting.
|
keesan
|
|
response 60 of 90:
|
Dec 27 17:58 UTC 1999 |
Is there ever anything in the motd to the effect that your vote does not count
towards actually electing members unless you have paid for 3 months?
|
orinoco
|
|
response 61 of 90:
|
Dec 27 19:19 UTC 1999 |
If nothing else, the vote program tells you that.
|
janc
|
|
response 62 of 90:
|
Dec 28 05:49 UTC 1999 |
It should also be pointed out that, at least in theory, it is possible
to stuff the non-member voting box. Just take out a bunch of accounts,
and vote them all for your favorite person. I don't believe this has
ever been done, but it's certainly possible.
|
spooked
|
|
response 63 of 90:
|
Dec 28 09:20 UTC 1999 |
Yes, exactly the point I was making.
|
remmers
|
|
response 64 of 90:
|
Dec 28 13:56 UTC 1999 |
Re #60 and #61: Right, the vote program tells you up front that you
have to be a member for your vote to count. Hopefully, people read
that information. Should it be emphasized more strongly?
Also, how do people feel about the practice of reporting non-member
votes?
|
other
|
|
response 65 of 90:
|
Dec 28 15:32 UTC 1999 |
it makes for an interesting look at things. there is little the we can infer
directly from the datum, but given whatever context we can complement it with,
it could be valuable for something, if only perspective.
|
dpc
|
|
response 66 of 90:
|
Dec 28 17:03 UTC 1999 |
Hm. I see that so far none of the Board members has yet admitted
his/her passionate desire to be Treasurer...
|
carson
|
|
response 67 of 90:
|
Dec 28 18:33 UTC 1999 |
(I wouldn't be surprised if most of them are trying to prepare for
serving on their first board.)
|
richard
|
|
response 68 of 90:
|
Dec 28 22:22 UTC 1999 |
#62,yeah but ballots can be stuffed inmember votes too-- janc, didnt
you a number of years ago buy or offer to buy people mnet memberships
in return for control of their votes in an election one year?
Its not like anyone with deep pockets couldnt do the same thing on grex?
|
don
|
|
response 69 of 90:
|
Dec 29 00:10 UTC 1999 |
What's this now?
|
eeyore
|
|
response 70 of 90:
|
Dec 29 01:21 UTC 1999 |
DPC: At this point, I figure that we'll get that decided at the next board
meeting all on our little own, without anybody constantly pestering us who
wants to do it. I'm sure that anybody who is interested will make his/her
interest known that night, and decisions will be made accordingly.
re: nonmember voting: I kinda like seeing the numbers of the non-member
votes...I don't know that it has any practical purpose, but it's really quite
amusing :)
|
other
|
|
response 71 of 90:
|
Dec 29 02:39 UTC 1999 |
re resp:68
richard, i *really* hope you're just trying (and failing miserably) to be
funny.
|
gypsi
|
|
response 72 of 90:
|
Dec 29 03:05 UTC 1999 |
Story of his life.
|
keesan
|
|
response 73 of 90:
|
Dec 29 17:10 UTC 1999 |
Ten votes would cost $180. Why would anyone want to PAY to be a volunteer
board member?
|
remmers
|
|
response 74 of 90:
|
Dec 29 20:33 UTC 1999 |
Re resp:68 and related - Richard has the story a little garbled,
but it's true that several years ago Jan bought memberships for
a bunch of m-netters (myself included) in order to demonstrate
the stupidity of an m-net board decision to restrict memberships
to Michigan residents. Jan was living in Texas then and suddenly
found himself disenfranchised despite years of monetary
contributions and hard staff work on m-net's behalf.
The memberships were not solicited, and Jan didn't (and of course
couldn't) require that the recipients vote any particular way, so
I don't think it qualifies as "ballot stuffing".
|