IPSE CC Elections 2015

[TheFaQQer]

What could possibly go wrong?

Whichever numpty's name appears first on the list gets all the votes automagically

[Ticktock]

I've voted, but it felt like bollocks, having 13 votes.

I found 8 people I could get behind and put them in, but then found that from the remaining 10 I could still pick 5 - I didn't bother. No-one else stood out as someone I wanted to support. I think everyone being able to vote for every available seat is a bit silly.

I would have found it easier to have either 1 vote, with candidates winning places based on who gets the most votes, or a number (3, 5?) of "preference" votes - again, either winning in order of total number of votes received, or giving weighting to preference order, although that may be over the top.

As it stands, me not wanting to support 10 of the candidates feels pointless, and I'm certain with everyone having 13 votes all candidates will receive a fair number as people simply try to use them all up.

[mudskipper]

Yes, it was a penny drop moment for me realising I didn't have to use all my votes. So I just voted for the ones I wanted, rather than diluting that by using all my votes.

[TheFaQQer]

As it stands, me not wanting to support 10 of the candidates feels pointless, and I'm certain with everyone having 13 votes all candidates will receive a fair number as people simply try to use them all up.

I don't remember seeing the breakdown of votes last year - but last time there were 17 candidates to vote for so everyone got 17 votes.

If you remove the number of votes that someone can cast, you potentially run the risk that you don't fill all the seats - which means that the chances of the CC being representative of the members is a lot less.

I didn't use all my votes this year, though.

[mudskipper]

Whichever numpty's name appears first on the list gets all the votes automagically

Someone posts the link from their email on a public forum...?

[Ticktock]

If you remove the number of votes that someone can cast, you potentially run the risk that you don't fill all the seats - which means that the chances of the CC being representative of the members is a lot less.

I don't get it. How would you get empty seats?

Scenario 1: 20 seats, 20 candidates. Result - everyone gets a seat (even if they get 0 votes).
Scenario 2: 20 seats, 10 candidates. Result - everyone gets a seat, 10 seats are left empty.
Scenario 3: 10 seats, 20 candidates. Result - 10 candidates with most votes get a seat. The only way you don't fill all the seats is if >10 candidates all get 0 votes - in which case why should any of them get a seat?

Isn't either Scenario 1 or 2 what happened last time? Which is why I get annoyed at claims the CC "represent the ordinary members". Bollocks do they - they just happened to be around at the time and have no real mandate.

[mudskipper]

I don't get it. How would you get empty seats?

Scenario 1: 20 seats, 20 candidates. Result - everyone gets a seat (even if they get 0 votes).
Scenario 2: 20 seats, 10 candidates. Result - everyone gets a seat, 10 seats are left empty.
Scenario 3: 10 seats, 20 candidates. Result - 10 candidates with most votes get a seat. The only way you don't fill all the seats is if >10 candidates all get 0 votes - in which case why should any of them get a seat?

Isn't either Scenario 1 or 2 what happened last time? Which is why I get annoyed at claims the CC "represent the ordinary members". Bollocks do they - they just happened to be around at the time and have no real mandate.

There was an election last year (i.e. more candidates than seats). Not sure about previous years.

The CC are supposed to be representative members, rather then members' representatives if you see the difference. So it makes sense to vote for people that you think share the same experiences as you, and/or are representative of the wider membership if you think that's important. The role (over on the ipse forums) has been described as a 'critical friend' - they don't set policy, but provide feedback on policy proposals.

Any member can stand for CC, but unfortunately few choose to do so. No-one is prevented from being a candidate (AFAIK) so those who put themselves forward are probably as representative as you're going to get.

[Ticktock]

The CC are supposed to be representative members, rather then members' representatives if you see the difference.

That does make perfect sense, thank you. Seems a bit pointless, but makes sense. They are people who may or may not be like other people.

Well, good luck. I'm hoping that once you and the others I voted for get in things start to improve. At the moment I don't feel like most of the members of the CC are like me, or hold the same values as me.

There are one or two I see on the IPSE forums who actually speak out positively for ordinary members, but most of the time it's the , who also come on here, who spend most of their time telling ordinary members that they're wrong about everything and should stop whingeing about stuff they know nothing about, because it's a big bad secret that only the CC know about...

[malvolio]

I don't remember seeing the breakdown of votes last year - but last time there were 17 candidates to vote for so everyone got 17 votes.

Last years numbers are on the Notice Board on the IPSE fora (second page...)

If you remove the number of votes that someone can cast, you potentially run the risk that you don't fill all the seats - which means that the chances of the CC being representative of the members is a lot less.

I didn't use all my votes this year, though.

Last year, quite a few didn't use all their votes. the chances of non-votes causing empty places is pretty minimal, but if it did happen then that's fine; clearly those candidates weren't wanted.

[TheFaQQer]

Last years numbers are on the Notice Board on the IPSE fora (second page...)

Ta - I was looking under governance