[NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC EC Elections - Voting Starts tomorrow 23 Nov 2015

[Seun Ojedeji]

Hello James,

What was used in the past is not the right thing, that is my concern. I
have no problem with using the past threshold, I think now that it has been
raised makes any future election open to questioning. There is noting
currently wrong with the present NCUC bylaw as it concerns the threshold,
the NCUC bylaw is supposed to be followed even if part of it is flawed. So
I personally don't buy the Idea of ignoring an organization governing
document, the best that can be done is to put the election on hold, update
the bylaw to reflect the threshold and then that can be applied for the
election (if people preferred the NCSG threshold).

I believe we should forget about the past but think about the future
implications when applying things of the past in the present.

Regards

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 2:42 PM, James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net>
wrote:

> Personally I feel that given we are currently revising the bylaws
> recognising their unsuitability at the moment we would be best placed to go
> with the actual practise exercised during the last number of elections as
> its the practise that has elected the previous number of candidates to
> their positions, unless we wish to open up the previous elections for
> allegations of impropriety we should continue the current practise and wait
> until we have made a decision in the bylaws subgroup on this matter.
>
> -jg
>
> From: Ncuc-discuss <ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org> on behalf of
> Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
> Date: Tuesday 24 November 2015 at 1:33 p.m.
> To: Tapani Tarvainen <tapani.tarvainen at effi.org>, NCUC-discuss <
> ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
> Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC EC Elections - Voting Starts tomorrow 23
> Nov 2015
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Tapani Tarvainen <
> tapani.tarvainen at effi.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Bill,
>> Technically changing the weights in the list is trivial (I think
>> Maryam could do it in about 15 seconds), if that's what you decide.
>> This is not a technical problem but a political decision.
>>
>
> SO: This is a very useful information. So there is no timing issue in
> doing the right thing here.
>
> Regards
>
>>
>> Tapani
>>
>> On Nov 23 12:56, William Drake (william.drake at uzh.ch) wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Ed
>> >
>> > > On Nov 23, 2015, at 12:10 AM, Edward Morris <egmorris1 at toast.net>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > So rather than the 4-2-1 voting proportions used for NCSG  elections,
>> NCUC elections are run using a 2-1-1 vote weighing system. In practical
>> terms the NCUC Bylaws give more power to individual members, the NCSG
>> Charter to large organisations.
>> > >
>> > > I do hope the tabulation software will be programmed to accurately
>> reflect the NCUC Bylaws. We have several contested elections with some fine
>> candidates and in fairness to them it would be good to use the vote
>> weighing system contained in our Bylaws and not that of our SG.
>> > >
>> >
>> > This puzzled me so I checked with Glen and Maryam as well as the 2013
>> and 2014 final vote tallies I have saved on my computer.  As far as we can
>> see, what we’ve done for some years now is follow the NCSG Charter's vote
>> weighting rather than the NCUC Bylaws' weighting, which was defined prior
>> the SG's formation. You were on the NCUC EC when we did this in the 2013
>> election and I don’t recall it being an issue.  There’s obviously an
>> argument for having harmonization with the later and technically higher
>> level model, no?  Why should we change direction at this point?
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, Tapani (king of the data base) is off line today, so
>> maybe we’ll hold off a day on sending out ballots until we can hear from
>> him.  I’m about to get off a bouncy train in Zurich where I teach for four
>> hours, and in any event have never touched the data base, so I’d rather
>> make sure that our understanding fits with his.
>> >
>> > Best
>> >
>> > Bill
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> *Seun Ojedeji, Federal University Oye-Ekiti web:
> http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535 **alt
> email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
> <seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*
>
> Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
>
>
>


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------





*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
<http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
<seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*

Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20151124/0e0186ed/attachment-0002.html>