Open Stack

On 2016-10-11 02:07 PM, Clay Gerrard wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Anita Kuno <anteaya at anteaya.info> wrote:
>
>> On 2016-10-11 01:40 PM, Ed Leafe wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 11, 2016, at 12:17 PM, Anita Kuno <anteaya at anteaya.info> wrote:
>>>
>>> There really needs to be a period when a) we know who all the candidates
>>>>> are, and b) voting has not yet begun.
>>>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>> The voting period is open for a period of several days, voters have the
>>>> ability to vote at any time during that voting period.
>>>>
>>>    Because many people vote as soon as they receive their ballot.
>>>
>> That is their choice.
>>
>>
> Anita,
>
> I agree, that voters may choose to refrain from voting.  I don't hear
> anyone saying "people *can not* make time for thoughtful reflection on the
> candidates" - but suggestion that perhaps they *did not*?  Is there anyway
> we could get numbers about how many voters waited until the end of week
> like I did?

No, there is no report from the service that outputs timestamps of when 
votes were submitted.

Now, if the supervisor of the election choose to monitor the status page 
of the poll whilst the poll was happening that person could track how 
many votes were submitted at the time the status page was rendered, 
however it wouldn't be possible to independently verify this information 
and I personally feel asking an election official to add this to their 
duties (what happens if they got pulled onto a more important task?) 
isn't something I would feel comfortable with. Administering elections 
is already stressful enough.

>
> If most voters did wait until later in the week, I think we can reject the
> premise as false and accept that the week while voting is open *is* the
> time in the process that most of the electorate uses for reflection on the
> candidates.
>
> If many *did* vote early in the week before some policy/platform points
> were discussed one might even assume these voters have some remorse -
> perhaps they will behave differently next time?  Not known.

Agreed, this is not known. What also is unknown is the number of people 
that voted early, followed the discussions and didn't feel any remorse 
in their voting choices.

>
> OTOH, if we actively broadcast a period of time with the expressed purpose
> of facilitating this discussion I think it sends a message that we as a
> community expect this discussion to happen and have an impact on the
> results of the election.  Is there a *downside* to a 3 week election period
> as proposed by Ed, Chris and others?

Yes, there is a downside. As I have said several times already in this 
thread, expanding the duration of the election from beginning to end 
increases the time commitment and stress for the election officials. The 
job already takes a lot of planning and a minimum of one month per 
release for the ptl and tc elections, for the nomination period and the 
voting.

Now if people want to explore other opportunities for how candidates are 
differentiated that is fine, so far we seem to be circling around 
different versions of what I had offered. I do think we can come up with 
other ideas. I also think that implementing other ideas can be done in 
the given time frame.

The option I offered was completed during the election timeframe, I 
didn't need to expand the election timeframe to offer additional 
communication about candidates.

Thank you,
Anita.

>
> -Clay
>
>
>
>
>>    I know that I typically do so that it doesn’t get lost under the flood
>>> of email.
>>>
>> I have found putting a star on the email when it comes it helps to ensure
>> I don't lose it, but everyone has a different email organizing workflow.
>>
>>    This wouldn’t be so bad if you could later change your vote, but once it
>>> is cast, it can’t be changed. What that means is that if a candidate I knew
>>> little about says something that either interests me or turns me off, I can
>>> *use* that information.
>>>
>> You still can now, you just have to choose to listen to candidates prior
>> to voting.
>>
>> Monty suggested somewhere that we reissue the email ballots everyday
>> (since we had email issues this time, I have no idea if that would result
>> in us being kicked off the service we currently use or not). If the issue
>> is, I want to ensure I can find my ballot when I need it, I think we can
>> explore options that don't include requiring election officials to expand
>> their commitment for an additional week.
>>
>>
>>> A voter can ask the panel of candidates any question they wish such that
>>>> they are satisfied prior to voting.
>>>>
>>> Of course; no one has said otherwise. But if someone else asks a question
>>> that may not have occurred to me to ask, the answers given can still be
>>> influential on my choices. Look at Gordon Chung’s question in this recent
>>> cycle: I’m sure that there were lots of people who benefited from that
>>> question and the many answers, not just Gordon.
>>>
>> I know I benefited from Gord's question, both as a candidate and as a
>> voter. Thank you, Gord.
>>
>> Again, I feel the choice exists.
>>
>>
>>> Additionally should the decision be made to go forward with some form of
>>>> the candidate answers as I offered to the electorate in October 2014, those
>>>> answers could be available as platforms are posted such that all responses
>>>> are available as soon as the poll begins.
>>>>
>>> I think that this is a great idea, and would be willing to help in the
>>> effort to make that happen again.
>>>
>> Thanks Ed, it felt satisfying to offer it when I did it. I hope others
>> feel the same as you.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Anita.
>>
>>
>>
>>> -- Ed Leafe
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>