SubjectRe: The evils of email voting - an unbiased report
Fromm_young@pop.ihug.co.nz
DateWed, 15 Nov 2000 13:42:04 GMT
Think Andrew got it right in the 1st half of his Subject Title.

It is evil, dont do it!

Regards,
Michael Young




> Problems with e-voting:
> (1) face to face discussion often explains things better than email, with
> more explanation of what people don't understand, and more "This doesn't
> feel right because of this - what do you reckon?", and less flaming.
> 
> (2) email voting encourages the "wrong" sort of voting. Those who don't care
> to make an effort to come along to the gods but want to insert their 2-cents
> worth can. I'm not a 1-person, 1-vote believer. Those who care, listen to
> opinions & put effort in COUNT MORE than others IMO. 
> 
> (3) Those ignorant of the issues can vote. A vote can be stacked more
> easily, less obviously.
> 
> (4) The "consensus" voting that is sometimes used: "7 for, 2 against - OK,
> what about it don't you two like? Can we address that?" is lost.
> 
> (5) Those without email or who can not / will not get DQ lists on their
> email accounts would be disenfranchised.
> 
> Advantages:
> (1) You would (probably) get a wider range of people voting, which is more
> democratic, representitive, etc. Warm fuzzies, inclusion, etc.
> 
> (2) Those who can't make it to the Gods meetings (Church, children, other
> Sunday commitments) can vote.
> 
> I think that while we can muster up quorums when there are things to vote on
> (and there haven't been things to vote on lately), we shouldn't transfer to
> e-voting.
> 
> If we did go to email voting, I would want the vote to be public - no secret
> ballots.
> 
> Andrew
> -----Original Message-----
> 
> A while ago, it was suggested that voting could be done on the e-mail list. 
> At that time there wasn't a clear mechanism for this but, by using a 
> moderated list it could be done. The proposed mechanism is as follows.
> 
> A new, moderated, list called dq-vote is set up. Anyone can post to it but 
> all the posts are sent to the moderator, usually the current meeting chair 
> or the secretary or both. There is no bounce back to anyone on the list. 
> When a vote is called, the moderator posts a message to dq stating what is 
> to be voted on. Anyone who wishes to vote has to reply to dq-vote with 
> their vote. There must be enough separate votes, one per e-mail address, 
> that number to the current quorum or more to make the vote count valid. 
> Once voting is closed, usually a week after the initial post, then the 
> votes are counted and the results posted back to dq. This means that all 
> voting is secret ballots.
> 
> Comments? Is this feasable?
> 
> Keith
> 
> 
> -- to unsubscribe see http://www.kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --
> 




-- to unsubscribe see http://www.kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

SubjectRe: Seagate
Fromm_young@pop.ihug.co.nz
DateWed, 15 Nov 2000 14:05:03 GMT
Go for it Keith



> I'd like to have at least one article in the upcoming Seagate Times 
> describing the conditions in Seagate at the moment and would like some 
> feedback or comments on the subject.
> 
> I presume we've still got a lot of refugees around the town from the Dark 
> Circle and I was thinking that would cause an increase in the number of 
> beggers around the place and also be an increase in petty crime 
> (pickpocketing etc) as there isn't enough to go around - what with the 
> embargo on grain based foods. A black market has probably already been 
> started. It could even get as far as organised crime.
> 
> Comments please? There could be an adventure hook or two in this.
> 
> Keith
> (phaeton@ihug.co.nz)
> 
> 
> 
> -- to unsubscribe see http://www.kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --
> 




-- to unsubscribe see http://www.kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --


Next