The Voting Process

[DJ Apostrophe]

Originally Posted by Philistine

So. Has anyone who sent a request to the Election Committee received a response back as to how they're going to count the votes?

--Philistine

I was part of the team that ran the Mr. Ma cup (shameless results plug: http://www.prisedefer.com/results/Tournaments/MrMa2008/) over the weekend, and on Saturday night, a large crowd went out for dinner. The crowd included Brad Baker. Someone asked if they had received an answer yet. As of then the Election Committee had not answered the question about vote counting that has been asked by both slates and many voters.

-w

[Peach]

Anybody besides me suspect that they just don't know how they're going to do it?

Originally Posted by DJ Apostrophe

I was part of the team that ran the Mr. Ma cup (shameless results plug: http://www.prisedefer.com/results/Tournaments/MrMa2008/) over the weekend, and on Saturday night, a large crowd went out for dinner. The crowd included Brad Baker. Someone asked if they had received an answer yet. As of then the Election Committee had not answered the question about vote counting that has been asked by both slates and many voters.

-w

[tchwojko]

Originally Posted by Peach

Anybody besides me suspect that they just don't know how they're going to do it?

I was assuming that was the case unless and until I heard otherwise.

[Swordmaster]

Originally Posted by tchwojko

I was assuming that was the case unless and until I heard otherwise.

I believe they know full well how they are going to count the votes. There is just nothing in the by-laws that says they have to reveal that on a forum for debate.
Before the deadline is here I am sure they will contact both slates for a representative to be sent to CO to monitor the vote.
I really just find this whole thing a huge waste of money that the USFA doesn't have right now anyway.
Thanks...USFFC

[Philistine]

Originally Posted by Swordmaster

There is just nothing in the by-laws that says they have to reveal that on a forum for debate.

Nobody's saying the Committee has to reveal it on this forum for debate.

I think, on the other hand, for a number of reasons, that they should announce it to the voting membership.

In any event, I can't think of a single reason why they shouldn't announce it to those members and candidates who have asked for it.

The bylaws state:

"The form of ballot and return envelope shall be prescribed by the Election Committee and shall be designed to minimize ambiguity and to allow easy andaccurate validation. Where three or more candidates have qualified for any office,the ballot shall be designed according to a system of preferential voting. "

They also charge the Election Committee to "fairly administer the election."

Given that there are multiple methods of preferential voting, and various methods may give different results for the exact same votes--I don't think it's asking too much to have them describe the method in advance.

--Philistine

[mfp]

Originally Posted by Swordmaster

I believe they know full well how they are going to count the votes. There is just nothing in the by-laws that says they have to reveal that on a forum for debate.

The bylaws refer to Robert's Rules of Order and as it's been pointed out earlier in this thread, RRO state:

Originally Posted by Robert's Rules of Order

When this or any other system of preferential voting is to be used, the voting and counting procedure must be precisely established in advance and should be prescribed in detail in the bylaws of the organization. The members must be thoroughly instructed as to how to mark the ballot, and should have sufficient understanding of the counting process to enable them to have confidence in the method.

[KD5MDK]

Using Robert's Rules of Order properly would be a first, from my experience visiting Board meetings.

[oso97]

Originally Posted by Swordmaster

I really just find this whole thing a huge waste of money that the USFA doesn't have right now anyway.
Thanks...USFFC

No, the real waste of money and time is going to be when Tracy loses the election and files a lawsuit claiming that she lost because the election was improperly handled.

The kicker is, she'll be right. But, will she be able to swallow her pride for the good of the organization? Time will tell.

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by oso97

No, the real waste of money and time is going to be when Tracy loses the election and files a lawsuit claiming that she lost because the election was improperly handled.

The kicker is, she'll be right. But, will she be able to swallow her pride for the good of the organization? Time will tell.

no, she wouldn't. She'd be right that parts of the election (notably the issue discussed above) were not handled properly, but she'd be wrong in claiming that's why she lost. This, this, and this have a lot more to do with her slate losing.

-m

[oso97]

Originally Posted by epeemike81

no, she wouldn't. She'd be right that parts of the election (notably the issue discussed above) were not handled properly, but she'd be wrong in claiming that's why she lost. This, this, and this have a lot more to do with her slate losing.

-m

Sorry, she'll claim that the election was unfairly administered and should be tossed out. Better?

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by oso97

Sorry, she'll claim that the election was unfairly administered and should be tossed out. Better?

Better than saying "and she'd be right" in her claim that she lost BECAUSE of it? Absolutely.

-m

[oso97]

Originally Posted by epeemike81

Better than saying "and she'd be right" in her claim that she lost BECAUSE of it? Absolutely.

-m

What I was trying to say, my pedantic friend, is that she'll claim that she lost because of the improperly administered election. And her claim that the election was improperly administered will be correct. Sorry if you couldn't follow the antecedents well enough! :P

[tchwojko]

Originally Posted by oso97

Sorry if you couldn't follow the antecedents well enough! :P

Bringing family into the fray is a low blow!

[ysbadadden]

The real waste of money will be when someone puts in a formal appeal to the EC, and when that's ignored, gets an injunction to stop the election until the Bylaws procedure is adequately followed. Suing after the election won't work, if there's been no protest before it.

Originally Posted by mfp

The bylaws refer to Robert's Rules of Order and as it's been pointed out earlier in this thread, RRO state:Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert's Rules of Order
When this or any other system of preferential voting is to be used, the voting and counting procedure must be precisely established in advance and should be prescribed in detail in the bylaws of the organization. The members must be thoroughly instructed as to how to mark the ballot, and should have sufficient understanding of the counting process to enable them to have confidence in the method.

[Swordmaster]

Originally Posted by tchwojko

Bringing family into the fray is a low blow!

Better watch it! You will be charged with being flippant on this thread....

I think we need Peter's Psephologic skills applied the the straw poll thread concerning the VP race and see what his number crunching can come up with on that.

Originally Posted by oso97

No, the real waste of money and time is going to be when Tracy loses the election and files a lawsuit claiming that she lost because the election was improperly handled.

If the straw poll is any indication, I think it will be a moot point as far as her race is concerned. Now as far as the VP race, The Ballot was clearly marked (for those who took the time to read it) concerning how to mark the ballot when casting your vote for the THREE Vice Presidents that were to be elected. There seems to be a lack of understanding about how the votes are tallied in a preferential voting system. I don't believe ignorance on the part of the voter is an excuse to throw the election out.

[FencingKitten]

I'll dogpile him real quick so no one else has to.

Swordmaster, while yes, there were clear instructions, the argument is in how following those instructions could affect the vote.

As has been pointed out, different systems of preferential voting can take the exact same data set and acheive different results, which is why the stats-lovers here want to know exactly how it's going to go.

I personally believe that we're going to come down with a data set that goes the same way no matter which system is used, but that's just my $.02, not fact.

[Capt. Slo-mo]

Was there some inherently evil problem with just marking your three favorite choices for VP...all the votes are tallied, and the three highest vote total getters are the three winners?

It seems to me that since there is allegedly no pecking order among the three post-election, why struggle with weighting who got the most 1st place votes or the least 3rds, or whatever preferential coin-tossing you employ?

But then, I'm no Psephologicalist...

[tchwojko]

Originally Posted by Capt. Slo-mo

Was there some inherently evil problem with just marking your three favorite choices for VP...all the votes are tallied, and the three highest vote total getters are the three winners?

It seems to me that since there is allegedly no pecking order among the three post-election, why struggle with weighting who got the most 1st place votes or the least 3rds, or whatever preferential coin-tossing you employ?

But then, I'm no Psephologicalist...

The ballot is supposed to be marked with a 1, 2 and 3.

Let's say there are four candidates A, B, C, D for three positions. Let's say there are 5 voters.

Vote 1:
#1 = A, #2 = B, #3 = D

Vote 2:
#1 = A, #2 = C, #3 = D

Vote 3:
#1 = B, #2 = C, #3 = D

Vote 4:
#1 = B, #2 = A, #3 = D

Vote 5:
#1 = A, #2 = C, #3 = D

Who gets elected?

[Capt. Slo-mo]

Well, if the voters just marked "X", it'd be: D, A and flip a coin. (In a perfect world, all election ties would go to Jerry Mathers, because, after all, he WAS The Beaver).

But with the information provided on the ballot by the election committee, how would you begin to figure out how to handicap the preferential aspect? Which of the dozen or more preferential styles of counting are they using?

That's right...they left that part out.