I hate to do this. As I was supposed to end this blog on a positive note. But three scrutineers have recently informed me about major irregularities during the vote counting. I want to be clear, these have not affected the results... this year. But if a more stringent system is not put into place, these irregularities can create a lot of problems.
1) When a student spoils one portion of the ballot, should the rest be counted?
For instance, if student X decides to write scribble all over the University Affairs box while making arrows and pointing to Seamus and making comments... Should that ballot still be counted for the other positions, if those marks are made in proper fashion?
2) If a student does not vote on the executives, but only chooses to vote on the referendum ones.
There was a ballot with "I do not care about the executives, but I want to vote on the referendums, so please count this ballot." A very strange request, as I would expect all ballots to be counted, and every "Readable" vote to be counted as well.
3) Piles of ballots not necessarely accounted for.
During the night, a stack of ballots were found. There was a long debate on whether those ballots were counted. When they realised that they were not, they thankfully counted them. But they still did not the source of the votes. RGN? UCU? FTX?
4) No clear rule to judge on these situations.
It is up to Candidate Reps to make a decision on certain questions. There are no general rules dictating the process. It is assumed that Official Reps will act in good faith and make responsible decisions, as opposed to partisan ones.
***
Before scrutineers get upset about this post, I want to be clear. NO RESULTS were affected by the irregularities described above. NONE. All races were clearly won.
I also realise that after a few hours, everyone knows who won the races. They are still "stuck" in the room, obliged to count every single vote, and after a while, a general lethargy starts creeping up on everyone.
***
One person in the room felt that Official Reps had way too much power to make extremely touchy decisions. For instance, if someone spoiled their ballot on the Seamus/Blake race, but decided to vote for Picard, Séguin's official rep might say the ballot should be spoiled. And Vice-Versa. I am not saying this is what happened, I am saying this is where certain conflicts can occur.
Also according to this person, these decisions should be made prior to the voting period, to allow students who do vote, to understand the consequences of their vote.
***
Some will say if it is not broken, why fix it?
Why wait until we get a problem? Surely the situation is problematic enough as it is now for someone to bring forward some changes to the methodology before the Presidential byelections.
More details to come in the next issue of La Rotonde.
-The End- (seriously)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I don't understand your obsession with the scrutineers. So what if a few ballots were lost? NOT ONE RACE WAS CLOSE.
A few ballots today is a a few ballot boxes tomorrow.
It's always best to err on the side of caution, rather than allow a slippery slope to evolve in an organization with annual turnover in its senior executive.
I'm just saying.
-jasonchiu
I, being one of the student representatives, can say that there was not a single ballot that caused any question regarding from where it had originated. Each race was counted a minimum of three times before totals were final. In all cases, when a portion of the ballot was spoiled, the unspoiled portion was still counted. Ballots that were cast only for referendums and not executives were counted and once again, THERE WERE NO PILES UNACCOUNTED FOR!
I, as a rep, cannot believe that scrutineers would make something like this up to cause drama. Every discrepancy was ethically decided upon by representatives from all parties. Believe what you will but this is what really went down in those 11 hours in that room.
Standard regulations would be a fine development for the future, but let us not cast doubt on the standards and actions of those involved this year.
I, also being an official representative - and we were not that many - was somewhat disturbed by certain practices.
It was extremely easy to communicate the results, as was shown through this blog when you communicated "rumor" (instead of just calling that race when you should have).
For all readers of this blog, we were reading this blog all night and I don't regret it for one second. Try spending 12 hours in a secluded room counting ballots that mean very little to you anymore. Your blog really spiced up the evening. (Thank you for that)
I agree that there were no major disagreements between official representatives but that was after the first hours, once we knew the outcomes.
As for the unaccounted pile, I am willing to be interviewed for La Rotonde to confirm it. There was a large pile of votes just sitting somewhere for a large portion of the night and we had no idea what to do with it. It turned out okay but it could have just as easily been disregarded. I still am not sure of the origins of those votes, and I was not aware the office was either.
All in all, the night went well. Sylvia prefers concensus to imposed rules. It is a system that works, even though it can be taken apart (by journalists) the next day.
I for one would have been more comfortable if there were stricter rules before the night began. I really do not think it is appropriate for official representatives to decide which votes count and which do not.
Also, I would say about half the candidates did not even have official representatives. If I was a candidate, that would not be where I would cut corners. Trust me.
Just because the irregularities did not influence the outcomes, they can easily affect them in a close race in the near future.
I stand by my sources.
I already spoke with Sylvia and La Rotonde is running a story on this issue.
Note to scrutineers/official reps/election office employees/Pam Hrick (status undetermined), and would like "your" side to be reflected in the article, please do not hesitate to contact me.
I leave Ottawa and this happens? You're everywhere! Including my copy of Tabaret!
Take a break young man. And come visit me in Toronto.
P.S. You're crazy. Seriously. 25 hours of blogging?
Post a Comment