Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4 ]

Subject: Re: Daily Digest. international observers? Author: Mike Redmond [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 17:33:19 05/01/03 Thu Author Host/IP: NoHost/209.17.158.14 In reply to: Jackie Anderson 's message, "Re: Daily Digest. international observers?" on 16:52:46 05/01/03 Thu I suppose if we held a leadership race every year (God forbid!) we'd be running it flawlessly eventually. But this is a new process, put together in a relatively short time frame by unpaid volunteers for the most part (or in the case of party staff- virtually unpaid). There is always room for improvement, but generally the rules have worked well, and with the odd exception, Delegate Selection Meetings proceeded smoothly. Having been DRO for six meetings and membership secretary for a seventh, I saw all permutations of the sytem, and the rules did, on rare occassion, come up with a result that not everyone liked. But there is no justification for any suggestion that the rules were designed to be biased in favour of any one candidate, or against any one candidate. Sometimes the bounce (or coin toss) went one way, sometimes another, but the rules were applied fairly as far as I could tell, and the appeals process of the party worked equitably as well. The issue of how to allow for youth delegates was a thorny one, and subject to a great deal of debate in the course of the rules being established. The final rules didn't please the youth organizations who thought this was a retreat from previous levels of youth participation in conventions, nor has it apparently pleased others who don't like youth having a priority. But these are choices the LSC made fairly and openly, and the rules have been applied consistently across the country. Our party, which has had its organizational challenges in the past, has managed to run a relatively smooth and successful process, operating on what other parties would consider a shoestring. We should congratulate those who designed and managed the process, rathter than nit-pick at them because it wasn't percieved to be perfect. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]