May 5th USFencing Straw Poll

[DJ Apostrophe]

With the recent drama and the decree from the Executive Committee, who do you see yourself voting for?

US Fencing Nominating Committee Candidates: http://usfanominees.com/

"US Fencers for Change" Petition candidates: http://usfencersforchange.com/

I've left this poll private, since that's how the actual votes will be recorded.

-w

[KD5MDK]

How frequently will these polls be reconducted?

[dekko]

Originally Posted by KD5MDK

How frequently will these polls be reconducted?

Not sure they would need to be reconducted but by all means, waste everyone's time by doing so. Polls are pretty worthless or weren't you watching the big presidential thing in 2004? According to all the polls the other guy was to be president.

Just curious wouldn't the mix of 'slates' be more likely than USFFC since they don't have a full group of candidates? I guess someone could vote for every except the sec on the USFFC 'slate' but....

[KD5MDK]

I think the USFFC consider the Secretary to be a part of their campaign too, since that's who they want for the role.

[gorgie101]

Originally Posted by dekko

Not sure they would need to be reconducted but by all means, waste everyone's time by doing so. Polls are pretty worthless or weren't you watching the big presidential thing in 2004?

Polls generally are very poor predictors of an out come. However the accuracy of a poll can be improved by the total number of votes. Right now only 56 people have put in their vote. If we could get that number up to 250 or 300 we might have a more accurate idea of what people are thinking. At least those that visit F.net.

[fencerX]

Where's the "I am choosing not to vote in this poll" radio button selection option?

[whtouche]

Originally Posted by fencerX

Where's the "I am choosing not to vote in this poll" radio button selection option?

Top right of your browser, it looks like an "X" button.

[seak]

While I'm sure I could find this somewhere in the by-laws:

What's type of election system is it? i.e. for Vice - president is it top 3 vote getters or is it a run-off style such that you have to get over 50% of the vote?

[KD5MDK]

Top 3 vote getters. Unlike USFA Congress Rep elections, I don't believe we get to cast 3 votes for one person.

Originally Posted by whtouche

Top right of your browser, it looks like an "X" button.

Dammit, I can't rep you.

[arc]

Originally Posted by fencerX

Where's the "I am choosing not to vote in this poll" radio button selection option?

Actually, we're missing two notable choices, in deference to Inq:

"This poll is flawed" and "This election is flawed" ...

[gorgie101]

Keep voting people! We almost have 100 votes. The more votes we get here the better the poll results are.

[T]

Originally Posted by gorgie101

Keep voting people! We almost have 100 votes. The more votes we get here the better the poll results are.

I hardly call this a representative sample of USFencing members. It provides entertainment, but that's about it. With this kind of sample, I would say that its sampling error is about +-90%.

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by T

I hardly call this a representative sample of USFencing members. It provides entertainment, but that's about it. With this kind of sample, I would say that its sampling error is about +-90%.

Actually, the sampling error is about 8.7% with 90% confidence (or 10.3% with 95% confidence).

Now, your statement that this is "hardly a representative sample" may well be correct. I certainly haven't done the research to see how accurately f.net represents the USFencing population. It might well be a representative sample of "likely voters"...

-m

[Mr Epee]

If it makes anyone feel any better, I've voted multiple times.

I haven't made up my mind yet... so I spread my votes around.

The funniest things in this campaign is that the majority of individuals able to vote in the election are not currently engaged by either this board or the USFA at any meaningful level. This means that they will be voting almost exclusively based on the information included in the packet.

The nominees have recently stated that they will only include very limited information, and will include both their personal data and platform on a single piece of paper (to save money and presumably the environment). This is a deliberate decision

Now, the previously mentioned unengaged voter often believes that there is something seriously wrong with the USFA (this assumption is based on many many years of attending non-national level events in the mid-western states). They repeatedly pay monies, but receive little palpable benefit. They honestly don't know the intricacies, and for the most part don't really care. To many people, USFA is just a string of letters that fits nicely either before, or after, an expletive. Will they vote?

Now, with that in mind, why would any candidate intentionally label their campaign "The USFA Nominees"?

Demonstrated understanding of effective brand management? C-

[Jason]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

The funniest things in this campaign is that the majority of individuals able to vote in the election are not currently engaged by either this board or the USFA at any meaningful level.

The USFA not engaging the membership in a constructive way is not funny, it's predictable.

The biggest thing I would have liked to have seen from either campaign is an even basic level of understanding about PR. If they don't understand it during their campaigns, I can't imagine that they'll understand it when they're running the USFA.

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by Jason

The USFA not engaging the membership in a constructive way is not funny, it's predictable.

The biggest thing I would have liked to have seen from either campaign is an even basic level of understanding about PR. If they don't understand it during their campaigns, I can't imagine that they'll understand it when they're running the USFA.

To their credit, the USFFC crew did purchase a full page advertisement in the last edition of the US Fencing magazine. They have also sent at least two mass e-mails. It is unclear what list(s) they used for distribution, as I didn't receive the first one. I did receive the second one that included the invitation to their online/teleconference chat.

I do not recall the USFA Nominees making any similar efforts outside of the NJ Coffee extravaganza and posting on this site.

However, neither side has shown any savvy in terms of being able to either define the debate, or stay on message. What I'm trying to say is that the candidates are not in charge of their own campaigns.

[seak]

Huh, I didn't get either of the mass emails. Well, now I just feel plum left out

I think the USFA nominees name was thrust upon them prior to them even really coming together, and somehow I doubt they'd be able to change what they were called on this board, even if they wanted to. Some labels just stick. That being said I agree with you, US Fencers for Change is a much better label name.

[oso97]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

I do not recall the USFA Nominees making any similar efforts outside of the NJ Coffee extravaganza and posting on this site.

As a member of the USFCA, I received some emails from some of the candidates who are also members of that organization.

[T]

Originally Posted by seak

Huh, I didn't get either of the mass emails. Well, now I just feel plum left out

I think the USFA nominees name was thrust upon them prior to them even really coming together, and somehow I doubt they'd be able to change what they were called on this board, even if they wanted to. Some labels just stick. That being said I agree with you, US Fencers for Change is a much better label name.

I can put you on the email list - you only need to send me PM or post your email address here...

The list that we used was the emails of all of the clubs listed on the USFA website plus all of the individual emails that each of us as acquired from past communications with the fencing community. The USFA will not share its email list although we can purchase mailing labels.

Derek Cotton suggested to both slates that we only include one sheet front/back of information for each slate in the ballot mailing. We all agreed that since websites were available that this would be a reasonable compromise. The original suggestion was that we not include even the 1 page each but I felt that it was important to provide minimum info for those who are not computer saavy. Kalle agreed.