= Сообщение: 6809 из 7128 ====================================== FTSC_PUBLIC = От : Dan Clough 1:123/115 20 Mar 23 16:40:00 Кому : Michiel van der Vlist 20 Mar 23 16:40:00 Тема : Re: 2023 FTSC Standing Member Election - Preliminary Results FGHI : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=3029.fido_ftscpubl@1:123/115+287e151c На : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=2:28/0+6418474e = Кодировка сообщения определена как: CP437 ================================== ============================================================================== -=> Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Andrew Leary <=-
AL> Due to the time frame of the revision being made and the closing of AL> the polls, the revision was made as the preliminary results were AL> assembled. I personally do not agree that the revision should have AL> been accepted, but I was overruled by the International Coordinator. AL> In the future, the rules will explicitly state that ballots cannot be AL> altered once submitted.
MvV> I object.
MvV> During my watch there was a precedent. Björn Felten, RC20, once MvV> requested that his vote be changed. I rejected the request, a MvV> vote cast is a vote cast. After some debate, my ruling was MvV> accepted by those concerned. I see that you intended to follow MvV> the precedent. That should have been the end of it.
MvV> The International Coordinator has a role in the election as MvV> primus inter pares of the ZCC when the ZCC decides to establish a MvV> nominating committee as documented in FTA-1001.007 paragraph 3.2. MvV> And that is it. Beyond that the IC is just a sysop as any other MvV> sysop in Fidonet when the FTSC holds an election.
MvV> In casu: the IC does not have the authority to overrule a MvV> decision made by the election coordinator.
MvV> I therefore insist that the ICs intervention is ignored and that MvV> it is the first vote and only the first vote of RC33 that counts.
As much as it surprises me, I must say that I agree with Michiel here.
Not only the precedent is important, but the general nature of changing a vote. Did the RC in question change his vote because of "secret" peer pressure that the public isn't aware of? Did he see an outcome coming that he didn't like, and wanted to attempt to change it? We don't (and won't) know those answers. In *ANY* other election in real life, a person isn't allowed to change their vote once it's cast. Why would/should one be allowed to do so here?
As far as my understanding goes, I don't think that in this case at least, the outcome was changed, but it could have been. I firmly support a rules change to prohibit changing a vote after it has been cast.
... Pros are those who do their jobs well, even when they don't feel like it. === MultiMail/Linux v0.52 --- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
