USFA 08: We have election.

[Mr Epee]

The news section on the US Fencers for Change website was updated yesterday to announce that they have received 522 signatures for their petition. This is more than twice the required number...

3/17/2008 Petition NEWS: As of this morning, we have 522 signatures on our petition to be placed on the ballot. We would like to thank everyone who signed the petition and especially those who helped us collect signatures. Petitions will be mailed to the USFA office as specified in the bylaws by the end of this week. It looks like we are going to have an ELECTION! Help us get out the word to VOTE in May.

Tis the season.

[T]

And what is that website address, you ask?


www.usfencersforchange.com

[whtouche]

Wooo. This is a great way to spend the USFA's money!

[epeemike81]

And what is that website address, you ask?


www.usfencersforchange.com

Nobody that I saw asked...

I certainly didn't.

Thanks, though.

-m

[Mr Epee]

Nobody that I saw asked...

I certainly didn't.

Thanks, though.

-m

Oops...

Actually, when you take a direct quote, it's actually polite to provide a link.

My bad for not providing the link.

Ok...

There is no longer a point in misdirecting debate towards cost of an election. Unless major fraud is declared, the election will happen. Avoiding democratic process isn't an acceptable method of cost reduction. Can we at least agree on that point?

That's good for everyone.

Congrats to all individuals who are up for election.

Now... prove that YOU belong.

This is an excellent moment for personal statements. This isn't about slates. It isn't about parties. What can YOU bring to the table?

Cheers!

[Inquartata]

Even when the debate is over, there remains the satisfaction of complaint..

We know too that Congress IS going to waste our tax money on a lot of stupid pork-barrel projects. The fact that it "will happen" is no reason to fall silent on the matter...

[Mr Epee]

If there are no opposing candidates, then there is no debate.

The debate isn't 'over' -without an opposition party... in never began....

I see your post, but I don't get your point...

What's your point, Inq?

[dekko]

I will admit, I don't care who is doing what except for voting for Greg to hold the wallet. As long as he is in charge of the money the rest can be whomever. Don't know if he will have a name opposite his on the ballet but if he does, his last name better be Greenspan, first name Alan.

[KD5MDK]

Actually, Alan Greenspan's star is in eclipse right now, given the current financial difficulties built up during his tenure. But that's off topic for here. It also doesn't change that I'm not familiar with anyone better qualified to serve as treasurer for the association than Greg.

[NotIndPk]

[ivlobane]

Wooo. This is a great way to spend the USFA's money!

Even when the debate is over, there remains the satisfaction of complaint..

We know too that Congress IS going to waste our tax money on a lot of stupid pork-barrel projects. The fact that it "will happen" is no reason to fall silent on the matter...

...What's your point, really? All I see is an attempt to sow some FUD...

[parrythis]

Wooo. This is a great way to spend the USFA's money!

Giving back to the members in the form of letting them decide who is going to lead them - yes, I would say that it is.

[T]

Who gets to vote and how?

All USFA members as of Feb 1, 2008 who are at least 18 years old are eligible to vote. The bylaws state that the ballots will be mailed out around May 1 to all eligible voters. These are paper ballots that have to be completed and returned by mail (and you provide the stamp) by the middle of June. The ballot will have the exact date but it will be 14 days before the USFA annual meeting which takes place at the summer nationals the first week of July.

Whichever candidates you support, I encourage everyone to vote.

[noodle]

Wooo. This is a great way to spend the USFA's money!

you know, i bet they could contract someone out to create a reasonably secure online voting process, which could negate the need to spend a lot on mailing and lots of vote counting.

there's enough personal information required to register a USFA account that isn't public knowledge (i.e. not on your card) that i think a person's identity could be verified with reasonable accuracy.

[ivlobane]

you know, i bet they could contract someone out to create a reasonably secure online voting process, which could negate the need to spend a lot on mailing and lots of vote counting.

there's enough personal information required to register a USFA account that isn't public knowledge (i.e. not on your card) that i think a person's identity could be verified with reasonable accuracy.

You're absolutely right, but I'm not sure the bylaws allow that....

[Craig]

you know, i bet they could contract someone out to create a reasonably secure online voting process, which could negate the need to spend a lot on mailing and lots of vote counting.

there's enough personal information required to register a USFA account that isn't public knowledge (i.e. not on your card) that i think a person's identity could be verified with reasonable accuracy.

That's something that I believe would require a change in the bylaws. Heck, you can put a $0.01 authorization on a credit card to verify identity (there are some companies that do that now - Google/Yahoo/MSN are 3 that I have experience with.)

I'm working scheduling to get some interviews done. Tracy is first up as soon as I can get a time that works for us both.

Craig

[epeeforlife]

you know, i bet they could contract someone out to create a reasonably secure online voting process, which could negate the need to spend a lot on mailing and lots of vote counting.

there's enough personal information required to register a USFA account that isn't public knowledge (i.e. not on your card) that i think a person's identity could be verified with reasonable accuracy.

Just like they've implemented online registration?????

[parrythis]

you know, i bet they could contract someone out to create a reasonably secure online voting process, which could negate the need to spend a lot on mailing and lots of vote counting.

They wouldn't even have to spend money on contracting to have something created. There are web-sites out on the internet that host secure online voting. Some of them are even 100% free.

No need to re-invent the wheel.

[parrythis]

The problem with online elections is that those without easy internet access or ability to use computers would feel disenfranchised. You also cannot count on e-mail addresses obtained a year ago to still be valid today. People sometimes check their e-mail infrequently or stop using a particular address altogether, but the address still accepts the mail, giving no "reject" information to the sender.

[noodle]

They wouldn't even have to spend money on contracting to have something created. There are web-sites out on the internet that host secure online voting. Some of them are even 100% free.

No need to re-invent the wheel.

reinvention would be required in verification of USFA membership and voting eligibility.

That's something that I believe would require a change in the bylaws. Heck, you can put a $0.01 authorization on a credit card to verify identity (there are some companies that do that now - Google/Yahoo/MSN are 3 that I have experience with.)

probably would require a change to the bylaws, i'm just throwing it out there.

also, i'd like to think that not everyone has a CC or is willing to use a CC online to verify identity just to vote. there's got to be a more simple way.