Nominations are now open for the Cyberspace Communications, Inc. Board of Directors. In accordance with Article 4, Section d of the Bylaws, nominations will close on November 15 and an online election will be held December 1 through December 15. Terms of office begin on January 1, 2004, and are two years in length. Four seats are up for election this time around. Any current member of Grex who has paid at least 3 months' membership dues is eligible to run for and serve on the Board unless they are currently serving and are completing the second of two consecutive terms. (People in the latter group are eligible to run again in next year's election if they are still members at that time.) The terms of three board members have one more year to run: Mark Conger (aruba), Joe Gelinas (gelinas), and Anne Perry (mooncat). Hence there is no point in nominating any of them. The four board members whose terms end on December 31 are Eric Bassey (other), Greg Fleming (flem), Mary Remmers (mary), and Marcus Watts (mdw). Mary Remmers is completing her first term and is eligible to run for re-election. The remaining three are all completing the second of two consecutive terms and are therefore *not* eligible to run this time, although they can run in future elections. To appear on the ballot, a person must be nominated in this item by November 15 and affirmatively accept the nomination in this item before the start of voting on December 1. Seconds are not required. Self-nominations are permitted.225 responses total.
I'll start by nominating Colleen McGee (cmcgee). She's a long-time Grexer, fairwitness of this conference, and has had tons of experience serving on boards of nonprofits. She'd be a real asset to the board.
This response has been erased.
Oh, my Dog! My four-year reign of (t)error is coming to an end!
I'd like to nominate Kip DeGraff and Glenda Andre. Both would do a great job and we'd be lucky to have them on the board.
I nominate Mary Remmers (mary).
I'd like to nominate Todd Plesco (tod)
query-- if one or any of the three board members whose second term is up after next year wish to stay on beyond then, could they resign their seat now and run for one of the open seats instead. Technically if they resign, their second consecutive term was never completed, so they wouldn't be ineligible to immediately run again would they? Lets say for instance that Aruba wants to stay on as treasurer past next year when his second consecutive term expires. What if he resigns now, a month before the election. His seat becomes open, and there are elections for five seats instead of four. Then Aruba, since he hasn't completed two consecutive terms, would be eligible to run right away for one of the open seats right? This is a way to avoid having to figure out what to do with the treasurer's job after next year. Let Aruba resign now, he can let somebody hold the books until the end of the year, and then he runs for an open seat, gets elected, and becomes treasurer again in January and thus nobody else has to take over as full time treasurer any time soon. '.
This response has been erased.
The bylaws state--
Article 4
b. Upon serving two consecutive terms on the BOD, a person must
vacate the BOD for one year before being eligible to serve
again.
A board member must vacate the board for one year after SERVING two
consecutive terms. It doesn't say that a board member having been elected
two consecutive times, can't resign before his second term is up, and then
run for election again.
(There are easier ways to handle that particular situation, if we wanted to. For example, the Treasurer could appoint Mark bookkeeper.)
If anyone tries to make an end-around to evade the by-laws on the theory that he's unreplaceable, I'll vote against him. Even Mark is going to want to take a break some day. Grex can find someone else to take his place if it has to.
I would think that an appropriate interpretation of the by-laws as written would preclude the scenario richard proffers above. Perhaps a by-law amendment for clarification is in order, along the lines of [auggested alternate wording]: Article 4 b. A person shall be considered ineligible for election to the Board of Directors if, in the two most recent prior elections in which that person was eligible, that person was elected to the Board of Directors. This wording would unambiguously prevent any person from being elected to more than two consecutive terms on the board, without regard to the duration of their terms or any potential future changes in the duration of the term of a director. Thoughts?
The experiences of other organizations I've been in have led me to believe that having the same person serve as treasurer for too long can cause problems. Unless you have someone else reviewing the books any errors or quirks in their accounting method can snowball and result in a big mess eventually. I have the utmost confidence in our current treasurer, but relying too heavily on any one person is a recipie for disaster.
I agree wholeheartedly with the last sentence in resp:13 above. Also, Mark deserves a break if he wants it, but if he'd be willing to provide guidance and consultation to whomever succeeds him, I'm sure it would be greatly appreciated by us all.
We've survived without Mark in the past. We should practice surviving again next year.
Next year, Mark will still be on the board. Could we keep this item focused on board nominations, please? Folks who want to discuss other issues can enter new items.
I nominate remmers.
I'm not interested in pursuing the plan richard sugests, though I appreciate the nice things people said about me. I'd like to nominate Jan Wolter.
I nominate jp2. Or second him. Or whatever.
This response has been erased.
The score thus far: Nominated: cmcgee, jp2, kip, glenda, mary, tod, remmers, janc Accepted: jp2 Declined: (none) Suggestion: If you nominate someone and you're not sure if they read this conference, it might be a good idea to tell them that you did so. Nominations close on November 15. A nominee should become eligible (by being a member), and accept the nomination in this item, before December 1 to appear on the ballot.
I nominate Kevin Albaugh.
I support tod
I nominate Bhelliom and KRJ. bhelliom because she is a good member and from what I read of the minutes, it seems like she attends most of the meetings. Besides she's mooncat's roomie, and with both of them on the board, you figure they can remind each other to go. And krj. because well I have often heard him talk of how good the sandwiches at Zingerman's are, so I figure he'd probably like the excuse to go to Zing's more often :)
I support jp2 and will vote for him if he buys me a membership.
I'll run for another term. Thanks, Joe. Would either polygon or slynne consider serving on the board?
I dont know. I would like to do my part to help grex but I *hate* meetings. I will think about it. I'll send in some money for a membership anyways I guess, just in case.
This response has been erased.
Hehe, I hate meetings too, slynne. Grex's meetings aren't usually *too* awful, as these things go. Being at Zingerman's helps. :)
I think it would be great if Slynne were willing to run. :)
Hey, maybe we should play that up as an incentive to running for the Board -- great food at meetings! (You have to pay for it yourself, of course.)
And then there are the retreats in Cancun. Oops.
I'd like to second the nominations of slynne, bhelliom, and krj. I'm happy Mary is running again, too.
Valerie and I generally spend 7pm to 8pm every night putting kids to bed. It's fairly common for the process to go later than 8pm. Because of this, evening meetings are pretty difficult to attend, and attending meetings is pretty much the sole duty of a board member. I could probably find a way to deal with this, but I think there are plenty of people who can do the job as well with less awkwardness. So for now, I think I'll stick with just being on staff.
Do you read excerpts from "The C Programming Language" to your kids?
resp:24 - Thanks, Richard...I think. We neither or us need a keeper, though the strategy that you mentioned about reminders makes sense for anyone that can't right things down. :) I'll take a couple of days to think on it. Last winter was not the best period of time for me, and I'm still in the process of reconstruction so to speak. While this wouldn't impact my ability to be on the board and attend meetings, I still want to keep things in perspective and that means taking this into consideration. I'm also feeling a rather guilty for my lack of precence on the system lately, and I'd need to reconcile that with being on the board. While I would increase my precence on the system as a board member, grex itself and other users is why I primarily want to be around. So I'll take a couple of days, and post my decision then, if that is acceptable to everyone.
Sure, take what time you need. The drop-dead deadline for accepting a nomination isn't until November 30, in any case.
I'd nominate cross if he were near enough to attend board meetings. I would also join in seconding a couple of those who haven't responded, but what's needed is their response, not a second. (Possibly they're not reading coop? Possibly this should be linked to agora?)
I believe due to an amendment made some time last year, boardmembers can now call into the meetings. I don't know if the infrastructure is present at this time, but I guess now's a good time as any to put that amendment to work. If you're still upto nominating cross, davel, I'll second. (Do I have to be a member to second?) I'd also nominate jp2, if he hadn't pre-empted me and gone ahead. Sure he'd be a pain in the posterior, but I believe he would be a real value addition to the board.
I'm flattered, but I'm going to respectfully decline due to other time commitments. :-)
Re #39: No seconds are needed. Self-nomination is allowed. The only thing you need to be a member for is to appear on the ballot. (See #0, where I said all this.) Also, jp2 nominated himself already.
Here's a list of everyone nominated so far who has not declined.
People who have accepted their nominations are indicated with a *.
cmcgee
* jp2
kip
glenda
* mary
tod
bhelliom
krj
polygon
slynne
By the way, thanks to slynne for nominating me, but I'm going to decline. Doesn't feel right. Maybe in the future. (I've served three full terms in the past.)
Glenda wil accept or decline as soon as she sees what her schedule will look like. My current schedule has me either in class or TA for a class every evening until between 7 and 9. I could not accept in good conscience if I don't have some evenings free.
Regarding #41; Not for this election. I nominated jp2, if I'm not mistaken. Or maybe I just seconded him. Hell, I don't remember. my memory is clearly going.
I think you niominated and he accepted. Or maybe not. Point is he was already nominated by the time I got round to it. That's why I said "he pre-empted me..." Never mind. I'm hoping there is at least one non-local baord member. It would be interesting to see how it works out. But with just one non- local candidate, that might not happen this year
I will accept. However, I am not currently eligable to run as I am not a member. I am broke until tomorrow but will paypal my money then.
Not that it matters much, but jp2 nominated himself and cross seconded.
Actually, I think he nominated himself, and then I re-nominated him, and then he accepted my nomination. Not that it matters.
This response has been erased.
Yeah, slynne! Too cool.
Re #50: I took your statement of intent as a self-nomination. Of course, it doesn't matter.
I've decided to accept the nomination. Don't worry, it's not the headache talking...
Great!
About the headache not talking, or about the nomination? ;)
If your headache can speak and post in conferences, you should probably lie down or something. :)
*bats at the purple pixies around her head*
Well, that right there qualifies you for the Grex board! (#57)
resp:57 sat on my browser for ten minutes or so, because I forgot to hit the post button.
I accept Mary's nomination of me, as long as she starts to spell my last name correctly. :) Actually I'll accept regardless. Thanks for the faith Mary.
This response has been erased.
Would mynxcat like to be a board member? If so, I nominate her.
Ack, sorry about that. But I'm thrilled about the rest. Thanks.
Here's the current list of nominees who haven't declined. A * means
that they accepted. For purposes of this list, a "nominee" is anybody
who's been mentioned as a desirable candidate, including self-mentions.
Since self-nominations are allowed and only people who accept will
appear on the ballot, finer distinctions seem pointless to me. The
idea is to make it as easy as possible for folks to run for the board.
cmcgee
* jp2
* kip
glenda
* mary
tod
polygon
* slynne
* bhelliom
krj
mynxcat
The number of candidates now exceeds the number of open slots, so this
will definitely be a competitive election.
Re 57: Do you have the rightful possession of the grexbat? Otherwise that's not allowed.
How about a trial of arms to whittle down the contestants? :p
This response has been erased.
Nah. The idea behind elections is that they're peaceful substitutes for such barbaric decision-making procedures. But you knew that.
re 61 But was it worth it?
Remmers takes the fun out of elections. No violence, no graft... *whines*
Can I vote for the purple pixies?
Thanks for the nomination keesan. However, I will have to decline. I have too much scheduled to happen next year, and don't feel I could do the board justice at this point. However, I would consider running next year.
Only if they accept the nomination.
...And pay their dues.
We declare our intention to run for Grex Board! Vote for us!! Yay!
I second the Purple Pixies, but only if they've paid their dues.
I third the Purple Pixies, but only if they support NextGreX.
They also have to provide acceptable identification.
But if they can meet those requirements - sure, why not?
Hey, I came up with the purple pixies. Gimme that login!!!!!
it'snot yo alerady? hmmmmmmmmmmm ......
Snot
I nominate naftee.
Ooodoyou?
REMINDER: Nominations close on November 15. Nominees have until the start of the election on December 1 to decide whether to run. At this point, several people have been nominated who have neither accepted nor declined.
I'd like to nominate Steve Weiss (srw) for the board. Too, there must be people out there interested and willing to serve a term or two. Please don't wait for someone to think of you as a candidate, just jump in and volunteer yourself as a candidate. Being nominated isn't necessary.
My winter semester schedule has (mostly) been determined. I hereby accept nomination.
Yeah!
Just a quick question for future reference (as I have not finished reading through the grex charter/bylaws/amendment history)... Is physical presence a formal requirement of board membership? If not a formal requirement, is it a practical necessity in order to contribute meaningfully as a board member or have any board members ever served from afar?
Physical presence is no longer required for service on the Board of Directors. A membership vote last year answered this question. The question voted on allowed participartion over a speaker 'phone. No one has yet served from afar.
Really? Cool! I've been looking for a way to get more involved with contributing to grex. I'd like to formally nominate myself to run for one of the open BOD positions.
I second that nomination. I think Bruce Howard would be an excellent addition to the GreX B0D and encourage everyone to vote for him.
Current nominees (with those who've accepted marked with a *):
cmcgee
* jp2
* kip
* glenda
* mary
tod
polygon
* slynne
* bhelliom
krj
naftee
srw
* bhoward
Seven candidates at this point for four open slots. It's shaping
up to be a competitive election.
Just a quick question - is there a limit to the number of people who can be on board but not physically present at board meetings? If you have a limit of 1, you have bhoward and jp2 running for that position. So only one of these people can be voted to board.
There is not a limit. Technical arrangements may get tricky with more than one remote attendee, but I think we can work it out.
re 93 I'm not eligible to run for the board.
Because...?
("!members")
(there's also likely the issue of being a non-resident of the USA.
I'm not compelled to look up the relevant text.)
Add that he is underage.
This response has been erased.
Unfourtunately, I haven't paid for membership. Due to the rather precarious state of GreX accounts at the moment, I'm not really compelled to become one at the moment.
Although I have not been a paid member myself, I owould love to participate in thie election. If all possible, I nominate myself. I have sused to run a non-profit organization and am film. with fed. laws regarding tax issues. thank you for your time.
Jp2 is correct - a board of directors of a Michigan corporation can have a limited number of members who are under 18, as long as they are at least 16. I think the "limited number" might be 1. This is due to fairly recent changes in Michigan law.
Re #95: Timing issues could be tricky as well if the remote member is in a time zone significantly distant from Ann Arbor.
This response has been erased.
This response has been erased.
John, it depends a bit on the distance and whether they are based to the right or left of Ann Arbor. Someone based in the UK would probably have a fair amount of difficulty attending from afar unless they were a night person - a meeting held ~19:00 EST is around midnight in the UK depending on time of year. On the other hand, 19:00 EST is more like 08:00 or 09:00 in Tokyo which for me is actually quite a manageable time.
Again, you would expect the nominee to take the time difference into consideration in deciding whether he wants to run. For me, an 8:00 am time for a meeting would not work, but a midnight time is definitely more manageable :) My point is it's the nominee's call to make, not the board's. Of course, a responsible person would decline the nomination if the time did not work for him.
cmon, nominations close on saturday, there are seven nominees for four slots..surely a couple of more people want to run so there can at least be twice as many nominees as there are open seats
Why don't you run?
(I'm hoping C. S. McGee will consent to to her nomination.)
(Me too, since I nominated her.)
Deadlines:
November 15: Last day to place names into nomination.
November 30: Last day for a nominee to accept (and acquire
membership status, if they're not already a member).
November 15 has passed, so no new names may be placed in nomination. Any nominee who has not yet accepted has through November 30 to do so. I've emailed cmcgee, tod, polygon, krj, and srw alerting them to this.
This response has been erased.
This response has been erased.
Maybe we should have another item for allegations against running members?
A new item for discussion by and about the candidates would be very reasonable.
I would like to thank Mary for nominating me, but my current level of time investment in Grex is such that it cannot be increased. I have served on the board before, and it was both an honor and a good experience, but right now I think I am more valuable as a staff member, and cannot afford to do both. Therefore, I must decline.
I nominate willcome.
Thanks to whomever for nominating me. I will have to think about this. What night are the meetings held?
A night that is convenient for the Directors, of course. ;) Scheduling the meetings sometimes seems to be the President's major headache. :)
Typically board meetings are held on whatever weeknight looks best for all members, so it varies from month to month. I suppose if the calendar got really tight we could even look to weekend days or (shudder) evenings. Please consider giving this a try, Larry.
This response has been erased.
polygon also has said he is running for Washtenaw County Clerk (or something like that) next year. If he is elected and also to the grex board, grex would have an elected county official on its board. Would be pretty cool
Campaign items have never been a tradition here on Grex, but I think they're a great idea. I should also point out, though, that I think I'm the one who first used one for M-Net, so of course I think they're a good idea.
I think there's a command you can use to view candidates campaign speeches or something. I remember using something like that last year.
It's part of the vote program.
Where does it get the speeches from John? Some kind of direct link to the picospan item?
Each board candidate can prepare a short "statement" that the vote program will display on request. I'll be sending the candidates email on how to prepare such a statement and make it visible to the vote program. (I should do that soon, come to think of it.)
I'm still standing here going "hrmmmmm"
At least you've not wandered off. :)
This response has been erased.
No. Four votes per voter, and of that, maximum one vote per candidate.
Or, put better, one vote per open position per voter, and no candidate may be considered to be running for more than one open position simultaneously.
I've just sent email to all the candidates, and to all nominees who haven't declined, reminding them of deadlines and describing how to create a "campaign statement" that the vote program will display.
Here's the list of nominees at this point. People who've accepted
are marked with a *. Others have until the end of the day (EST)
on November 30 to accept, which should done via a response in this
item. Before creating the final ballot and opening up the vote
program, I'll check with the treasurer that all the candidates
satisfy the membership requirements.
cmcgee
*jp2
*kip
*glenda
*mary
*tod
polygon
*slynne
*bhelliom
*bhoward
*maximuzs
Please let me know if I've omitted anybody. (No nominations made
after November 15 can be accepted.)
This response has been erased.
There do seem to be a bunch of good candidates already. And I do expect to be fairly busy during the coming year. On the other hand, I'm not currently serving on any committees or deliberative bodies. Grex is very important to me. And I do have some background and skills which may be useful to the board. So, I'll accept the nomination.
Thanks Larry!
Grat news!
Oops, I inadvertently omitted krj from my list in #136. He was nominated but hasn't yet accepted or declined (unless I missed it). So please consider him to be a potential candidate at this point.
I'm going to decline.
Hey, can we sling mud? I need to know in time to get a good pail and shovel.
The mud-slinging has already begun in a couple of other items.
I noticed. I just wanted official permission first. Should we all create our own items, or just rely on our statements? I noticed this seemed to generate a lot of dialogue among users, which I like to see. Perhaps, once I finish with my statement, I will enter an item. My platform, of course, is not currently as extensive as Jamie's.
I like the idea of having individual items. And I'm enjoying the dialog. I'm looking forward to seeing more items here to discuss. I think this is especially beneficial for the non-AA-ites who have likely never met any of the candidates. This will let them know the candidates a little better
This response has been erased.
Your web site is a carbon copy of David Irving's, and he was beaten. Try that on for size, bucko.
REVISIONISTSCUM ,
HOLOCAUST_DENIER
CAN YOU DENY THE FUCKING FACTS?1
/.
Final reminder that the Board election starts tomorrow. Today is the last day for any nominees who haven't yet accepted to do so. Membership is required in order for a person to appear on the ballot. Someone is going to check Grex's PO box tomorrow for any membership payments that may have arrived over the weekend. As soon as I've been updated on that and have a final list of eligible candidates, I'll open up the vote program.
This response has been erased.
!members | fmt
resp:147 - Pistols or rhetoric? :p I was in the middle of getting my statement prepared this weekend, and now I'm searching for it. Of course, I'm currently at work, so I have to wait a few hours to put it up. Folks will unfortunately be looking at the statement from the last time I ran until later tonight. Oi.
The vote program is now open for business. To run it from a tty connection (dialup/telnet/ssh), type vote at a Unix shell prompt or !vote from just about any other prompt. Or you can access the voting facility on the web at the URL http://cyberspace.org/cgi-bin/pw/voting-booth The vote program allows you to view the list of candidates and their campaign statements, and to cast a ballot. If you do the latter and later change your mind about whom you want to vote for, simply run the program again and cast a new ballot. Your new votes replace any previous one. Any Grex user can cast a ballot, but only the votes of eligible voting members will be counted in determining the outcome of the election. Polls close at the end of the day (EST) on December 15.
Do I have to be paid through 3 months to have my vote counted, or should I have already been a paying member for 3 months when I cast my vote? Also, web-sites really aren't necessary. A discussion item is all I think is necessary. And James, the font on your site is teensy. It gave me a headache. So I've not gone through it. Any thing I should be paying attention to on there?
Re #158: You can pay up after you cast your vote, as long as you do so before the end of the election.
Does that mean three months into the future, or can be you on the third month of a three-month membership?
I believe the latter. (The treasurer can correct me if I'm wrong.)
This response has been erased.
There are two commands: "member", which is broken, and "members", which is
not. Try
!members | grep tod
Right. Didn't know there was a "member" command. It should probably be deleted.
(It is now deleted.)
(I was going to link member to members, but there is not sufficient space on the disk. :( )
remmers, so I have to be on the third month. I couldn't pay up for three months now, and have my vote counted? Or what if I pay now and say it's for the previous three months if I have to be on my last month? Will that work?
I think you misinterpreted my response. Yes, you can pay for three months now and have your vote count. Article 2.b of the bylaws specifies only that you have to have paid for three months worth of membership, but it can be any three months - past, future, current.
re 162 WHAT?!?! YOU MEAN YOU DON"T HAVE A tod PROGRAM?!? WHAT KINDA SECURITY PROFESSIONAL ARE YOU ?!
That's right. As long as you have paid for a consecutive 3-month period which intersects with the voting period, your vote will be counted. So it's fine for you to pay $18 now.
Neat, I'll send payment soon.
This response has been erased.
hi all in Grex: my question is : what if I send a game, will you put it in the grex server? Obviously I'll send the source. I have an old 80386 computer and I have a Linux server running on it. I programmed some things: a little basic menu, that reminds me of ATARI DOS-XE; a few games... etc. I think it can be nice to give the sources.
Re #173: Best way to ask about installing software on Grex is to email staff@cyberspace.org. Monday Dec. 15 is the LAST DAY to vote.
Sorry I was unable to change the statement or post anything. I've been sick since last weekend (Dec. 7) and haven't been online much.
I don't know where's a good place to say this, so I'll say it here: I think Mary has done a great job as Grex president this past year, and I've been very glad she's been on the board for the past 2 years. She's brought me back to earth a couple of times when I almost lost it, and generally provided a mature and stable outlook on every issue the board has faced.
Wow. Thanks, Mark. You made my day.
Gee, thanks Mark! You're just amazing.
Polls are now closed. Once I have a final eligible voter list from Mark, and independent counts have been done by myself and davel, I'll report the results. Hopefully this will happen within the next twelve hours or so.
Don't forget to take the "Polls are now open" sign off the Home page!
Ah yes. I'll email the webmaster (srw).
The pieces are now in place: Mark (aruba) certified the voter list,
Dave Lovelace (davel) and I independently counted the ballots and
got the same totals, so here are the results:
polygon 27
mary 27
slynne 23
bhoward 19
glenda 17
kip 14
bhelliom 14
tod 9
jp2 9
As there were four open slots, this means that polygon, mary,
slynne, and bhoward were elected to two-year terms on the Board.
Congratulations to the winners, and thanks to all the candidates
for participating in the election process.
This response has been erased.
(Unofficial non-member totals were bhoward 14, tod 12, jp2 10, mary 9, polygon 9, slynne 8, glenda 8, bhelliom 7, kip 4.)
This response has been erased.
This response has been erased.
Re #185: Busy at work this afternoon; I'll get that info together later today and post it here.
Thanks to all the folks who voted for me. I will do my best to deserve them.
This response has been erased.
Thanks to all the candidates - we had a great slate this year, and it's a shame more people couldn't be elected. Congrats to the winners!
Thanks very much to everyone who ran! I agree with Mark; there was a terrific slate of candidates and it was hard to choose amongst them. Congrats to the winners!
I am very interested to see how it works out for bhoward, conferencing in from Japan.
Same here. I hope it works well.
Wow! Thanks to everyone who participated in the election. I'm excited to have this chance to support grex in this role. A special thanks also to those who cast their votes for me. I'll do my best to earn the trust you've expressed. Mahalo! Arigatou gozaimasu! Or as Shakey Jake once said, "Thank you for your kindly"
This response has been erased.
This response has been erased.
Heh.
(as someone who was very disappointed in the slate of candidates, I am glad to see that my vote did make a difference.)
Holy shit, Bruce. I didn't even know you were running.
Re: #198: Why disappointed?
Thanks to everyone. It should be an interesting two years.
(minor question that I believe has been answered in years past: how many eligible voters were there, and how many of them voted?)
I believe there are 77 eligible voters, & 46 of them voted. John can correct me if I'm wrong.
This response has been erased.
It's innocent until proven guilty. I'm not sure it applies to your situation...
resp:204 (Jamie, Jamie, Jamie... you're a bright boy, but I'll point
out the obvious to you anyway: "member" does not equal
"eligible voter." 3-month rule and all that.)
This response has been erased.
I reported all the recent new members in Agora - there has been one since Jamie sent his mailing. Dave was referring to the number of eligible voters, which is currently (and was at the end of the election) 79.
This response has been erased.
There are 3 reasons a member might not be eligible to vote: 1) because he or she hasn't paid for at least 3 months, 2) because he or she is behind on his or her dues, but still in a grace period, and 3) because the member is not an idividual but an institution.
Try !members -v | wc instead. Obviously my memory was not good for a couple of minutes, earlier. I did this, then wrote a quick script (possibly buggy, so as I said John can correct my results), & then put in both numbers. But obviously it should have been 79 not 77. <sigh>
---- janc joining (Dec 18 21:58) janc: Is it safe to come out? janc: Under the limit, but over the plan. ---- janc leaving (Dec 18 21:58) Can you believe it?!
Actually you can just do !members -v -c . (-c tells it to count the group instead of listing it.)
I can't believe it!
This response has been erased.
Well, there you go - I'd forgotten that. Thanks Jamie.
This response has been erased.
Thanks to davel for reporting the number of folks who voted. We did
have a higher turnout this year, for whatever reason.
A few years ago I put code in the vote program to log the date and
time whenever someone casts a ballot. It also distinguishes between
whether the vote was by the tty interface or the web. I then proceeded
to forget that I had done this. A question by Joe Gelinas about the
availability of statistics on voting patterns jogged my memory. So
here are some results:
tty interface: 88 ballots cast
web interface: 30 ballots cast
Day-by-day activity:
ballots date
------------------------------
20 Mon Dec 1
12 Tue Dec 2
5 Wed Dec 3
5 Thu Dec 4
8 Fri Dec 5
3 Sat Dec 6
3 Sun Dec 7
12 Mon Dec 8
8 Tue Dec 9
5 Wed Dec 10
10 Thu Dec 11
5 Fri Dec 12
2 Sat Dec 13
6 Sun Dec 14
14 Mon Dec 15
Since people can vote multiple times, there's no particular correlation
between these numbers and candidate totals. We can see a bunch of voting
activity at the beginning of the voting period and another flurry at the
end (not surprising), plus a couple of bulges in the middle with less
obvious explanations.
This response has been erased.
How many new members did we get around the voting period, who then proceeded to vote?
We received two new members during the voting period. One send his check in November, the other in December.
Thanks Mark.
Once again, thanks Mark!!!!!
Danke, Mark!
TROGG IS DAVID BLAINE
You have several choices: