Re: problems with the election

[Dale Elliott <http://www.mengarelliott.com/~dale>]

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Bob,

I'm not talking about restarting the election. I'm talking about giving the
70 or so members who were not on this year's election roles a chance to
vote. Only those members (who we *know* did not get ballots) would be in
the second election.

Dale

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 9:20 AM Bob Gulino <http://www.unumhumbrewing.com/~bob.gulino>
wrote:

> Hi, Dale, All,
>
> As a candidiate in the current election, I am trying to be objective about
> this topic. It is in this sprit that I offer these thoughts.
>
> I am very wary about re-starting the election. Yes, there were problems,
> and we need to address them, but I am not sure that re-starting and
> creating a new election is the right approach. Here are just a few
> questions that pop immediately to mind:
>
>    - What if someone got the email properly, voted, but then does not get
>    the new email? That initial vote would be ignored, even though the member
>    thought he/she voted.
>    - How about future elections? What it this happens again next year,
>    but itâ??s only 25 people who donâ??t get the email? What is the proper
>    â??thresholdâ?? for how many people don't get the email before we re-start 
>    the
>    process?
>    - We announced the deadline for when new members could join to be
>    eligible to vote in this election. Adding members who joined after that 
>    day
>    would be a â??violationâ?? of our elections rules.
>    - And if we change that, do we need to change the deadline for
>    nominations?
>
> To me, re-starting the election opens up a huge can of worms. It just
> feels very risky to me.
>
> If we have an idea of who did not get the email (and it sound like we do),
> then I would strongly recommend that we simply add them to the current
> election â?? and NOT create a new election. I suspect that this type of
> situation has happened before with Election Buddy, so there is probably a
> mechanism for adding people. Letâ??s use that, and we can extend the end of
> the election if needed. If we extend the end of the election, we can send a
> note to everyone letting them know that there were a couple of minor
> problems, and the end of the election period has been extended. One week
> extension is probably sufficient.
>
> This would, in my humble option, be the much safer approach to finishing
> this election.
>
> Cheers,
> Bob
>
> On Sep 18, 2018, at 9:04 AM, Dale Elliott <http://www.mengarelliott.com/~dale> wrote:
>
> I can set up the new election tonight and send the emails. It will start
> at midnight tonight and run for 2 weeks, ending on Tuesday, Oct. 2 at
> 11:45pm.
>
> There are really more than 63 members to be added. The list I pasted above
> doesn't count members who joined since the last election and who were
> marked as "not active" in the database.
>
> For the board members: Is there any objection to this plan?
>
> Dale