With voting kicking off tomorrow I thought it's about time I devoted a bit of time to finding out about the candidates, so off I popped to the BV website.
There's not a lot to go on. One of the candidates I've got a pretty good feel for and ironically he's the only one who's given voters a means of contacting him (no prizes for guessing who!) The rest I don't know from Adam.
Does anyone know if there is more information posted about or by the seven candidates other than what appears at this URL?
With voting kicking off tomorrow I thought it's about time I devoted a bit of time to finding out about the candidates, so off I popped to the BV website.
There's not a lot to go on. One of the candidates I've got a pretty good feel for and ironically he's the only one who's given voters a means of contacting him (no prizes for guessing who!) The rest I don't know from Adam.
Does anyone know if there is more information posted about or by the seven candidates other than what appears at this URL?
It's funny seeing Ray Beecher on the list. He used to work for BV as an event mangler (GMBR, I think), and now works at the same place as my squeeze. AFAIK, he doesn't ride a bike much.
On 2005-10-02, Bob (aka Bruce) was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
Quoted message said:
vote out the old guard, I say. Pity I let my membership lapse (deliberately).
I'm wondering if all the suckers who would "vote 4 Jason BV" are no longer members as of the latest round 🙂
🙁
-- TimC Using top down development, you never have any working code. Using bottom up development, you never solve the problem. -- John Kelly in debian-user
One of the candidates I've got a pretty good feel for and ironically he's the only one who's given voters a means of contacting him (no prizes for guessing who!)
Who? 😄
Warning. blatant political (including scary foto) plug follows:
Can you explain how specifying only one candidate maximises my vote? I mean, it sure makes it simpler, but is there some odd weighting system used?
-- Shane Stanley
I assume that either you get 1 vote, so if you vote for 2 or 3 people, effectively only 1/2 or 1/3 of your vote counts per candidate? .. Or if you you really want someone to win and you get to vote for up to 3 candidates, voting for 3 of them will not ensure your preferred candidate to get maximum distance ahead of the rest.. Something like that ..
Can you explain how specifying only one candidate maximises my vote? I mean, it sure makes it simpler, but is there some odd weighting system used?
-- Shane Stanley
I assume that either you get 1 vote, so if you vote for 2 or 3 people, effectively only 1/2 or 1/3 of your vote counts per candidate? .. Or if you you really want someone to win and you get to vote for up to 3 candidates, voting for 3 of them will not ensure your preferred candidate to get maximum distance ahead of the rest.. Something like that ..
Seems reasonable.
I'd love to see a way to make your vote count *against* someone - say you can vote for 1 person, and vote against another!
In federal politice, it'd be great to be able to vote against the loony fringe religious nutcases and in the BV election, against people you know don't actually ride bikes 🙂
I assume that either you get 1 vote, so if you vote for 2 or 3 people, effectively only 1/2 or 1/3 of your vote counts per candidate?
I've never heard of such a thing -- which is not to say it doesn't exist, but I'd expect it to be spelt out somewhere.
Quoted message said:
Or if you you really want someone to win and you get to vote for up to 3 candidates, voting for 3 of them will not ensure your preferred candidate to get maximum distance ahead of the rest.. Something like that ..
I assume that either you get 1 vote, so if you vote for 2 or 3 people, effectively only 1/2 or 1/3 of your vote counts per candidate? .. Or if you you really want someone to win and you get to vote for up to 3 candidates, voting for 3 of them will not ensure your preferred candidate to get maximum distance ahead of the rest.. Something like that ..
Ash
Basically, yes
"you get to vote for up to 3 candidates" but you dont HAVE to
As explained to me by Harry Barber himself, if you allocate 3 votes they are of equal strength, thus you are giving 3 candidates a vote. The tally will be done purely by 'most-votes-received' so by voting for only one (or 2) you are effectively NOT voting for others who you dont want to get up*
* this candidate wants your vote but doesnt condone any voter's anti-candidate thoughts 🙄
Can you explain how specifying only one candidate maximises my vote? I mean, it sure makes it simpler, but is there some odd weighting system used?
Voting for one and only one candidate means that that candidate advances relative to ALL candidates. Otherwise, one of the other peeps you vote for could easily pip him/her/it at the post.
I'm assuming that the x number of candidates with the highest vote get elected.
One of the candidates I've got a pretty good feel for and ironically he's the only one who's given voters a means of contacting him (no prizes for guessing who!)
Who? 😄
Warning. blatant political (including scary foto)
yes, please stick to wearing your helmet in future photo shoots 😉
"you get to vote for up to 3 candidates" but you dont HAVE to
As explained to me by Harry Barber himself, if you allocate 3 votes they are of equal strength, thus you are giving 3 candidates a vote. The tally will be done purely by 'most-votes-received' so by voting for only one (or 2) you are effectively NOT voting for others who you dont want to get up*
* this candidate wants your vote but doesnt condone any voter's anti-candidate thoughts 🙄
any one need a baby kissed ?
Well that's certainly simplified things. One vote it is then.
a it OT but someone at yesterday's race was discussing the ballot with me and mentioned the recent (last years' ?) CSV board vote. Apparently it turned into a [censored]-fight with muck-raking abounding, emails flying all over the place!?!?
anyone know more about that? The (admittedly very) little I have had to do with CSV, somehow this doesnt surprise me 🙄 Altho perhaps that's judging the org by the candidates...
One of the candidates I've got a pretty good feel for and ironically he's the only one who's given voters a means of contacting him (no prizes for guessing who!)
Who? 😄
Warning. blatant political (including scary foto) plug follows:
"you get to vote for up to 3 candidates" but you dont HAVE to
As explained to me by Harry Barber himself, if you allocate 3 votes they are of equal strength, thus you are giving 3 candidates a vote. The tally will be done purely by 'most-votes-received' so by voting for only one (or 2) you are effectively NOT voting for others who you dont want to get up*
Makes sense. But by voting for only one, one is missing the chance to make it harder for those one doesn't want to get up, to get up.
Especially the third point under 'Members'. Hey cfsmtb,thanks for the info Do you happen to know how these changes affect "family" members? l can't find definition of "family" re their insurance policy on web,l have emailed BVI a query
