Nominations for 2008

[carwash]

I'm gonna have to push back on this...

I don't think that a person should be able to run for more than one position. The member should dedicate themselves to running for a specific position, and that position only. I cannot think of any organization that has elected positions that work in the manner that is being suggested. That would be like the president of the U.S. running for re-election to the presidency as well as running for governer of their state at the same time. That way they can be governor in case the presidency falls through? No way, that would just say to me that they are just looking for a political job, and aren't really dedicated to being president, etc.

It can't work that way. If that was the case, then everyone should run for every position. On top of this, why would someone want to run for two positions? By running for a position, you are saying "i want to help the club by doing 'this' job" whether it be president, treasurer, etc. If you run for multiple positions, it lowers my confidence in your ability in any or all of the positions.

If i say "I want to be president, but if i don't get that, I'd like to be the treasurer, and if that falls thru, then i would like to be a trustee." Sounds a bit wishy washy, and almost like we are making a mockery of our official positions.

In my opinion, dedicate yourself to one position and run for it. Make it the position you want most, or if you have a fear of losing your current office, maybe the position you think you have the best chance of getting elected to.

But, I don't make the rules, and in theory, no one officer makes rules like this... perhaps it is something that should go to an officer vote. Anybody agree?

[Stang849]

Not that my opinion counts for much, but I agree with Carwash

[fabricator]

I wouldn't think that C.O.R.E.
would want more than one person run for
more than one position at any time.

and if one wanted another position.
I would think that that person would need to step down
their current position so you can have the elections
for both positions at the same time
If this isn't allready in your bi-laws
you guys should address this at a
meeting, and revise your bi-laws
or make it a policy
Good luck with your desicion.

by the way, it takes 3 meetings for us to revise our
bi-laws, thus the reason that we do policies....

[JasonCJ7]

I agree with you Carwash. On a side note I am putting a deadline on the nominations of Weds. Sept. 26th. This way I can create a form for people to print out and make their selections to bring to the meeting. I need input though from the group, should we make a thread for people to cast their votes or say you only have a vote if you attend the meeting.... thoughts?!?

thanks,
jason

[tjjeepjeep]

I agree with Carwash as well. In theory an individual opted to run for an office based on their (and/or others) belief that they would benefit the club by holding that office. Otherwise, it appears to be a bid for a title instead of the opportunity to hold an office. It dilutes the strength of the officers and potentially the club itself.

[94Dodge Truggy]

Carwash has a strong case. Only one position should be applied for by an individual.

[carwash]

I agree with you Carwash. On a side note I am putting a deadline on the nominations of Weds. Sept. 26th. This way I can create a form for people to print out and make their selections to bring to the meeting. I need input though from the group, should we make a thread for people to cast their votes or say you only have a vote if you attend the meeting.... thoughts?!?

thanks,
jason

No, no thread for casting votes, as it should be an anonymous thing. What i would do is make a new thread with all of the final nominations, and let people that cannot attend the meeting submit their votes to you via PM. Then you can fill out the ballots and turn them in at the meeting. Perhaps the online voter should submit their votes to more than one person as well, just to keep it all in check.

It would be best if everyone was at the meeting of course, but some can't be, and that shouldn't keep them from getting to vote.

thoughts?

[94Dodge Truggy]

Looks like an excellent plan to me Carwash.

[Stang849]

Is there anyway to post a poll for each position, but limit it to members only voting? I've never created a poll on a forum so I dont know all the rules of setup?

I agree there should not be a thread for people to vote in, due to people being able to see who voted for them. But I question the PM'ing of votes too. Who ever is getting the PM's will know who voted for who. One way around it, is to close off nominations earlier than noted in previous posts. Create a form for all the candidates, and have anyone that wants to vote, mail in thier vote before the October meeting, if they can't attend the meeting.

[carwash]

Hmmmm... the poll thing won't work, it wont be anonymous either... poll votes are tracked and listed. I don't think people will take the time to print and mail a ballot either.

If it is only one or two officers collecting these absentee ballots over PM, i don't see it as a big issue... perhaps it should be a couple people that are not running for an office, and can be discreet and secret about it.

I'm just looking for a way to get as many votes in as possible.

[jeepmanjeff]

OK,OK,OK

Dually notes and I tend to agree also...I beleive we did it the way I said above in the past when there were not enough people that wanted the positions...I think. Heck I don't know.

Actually after posting it I did have second thoughts. uit was already posted and you know how people get when you delete things around here.:(

Any how run for one position only


if we do not have a person to run for a position then what do we do in the future? Suggestions???

[jeepmanjeff]

So I am running officailly for Re-Election.:):):):):):):)

[jeepmanjeff]

I say we do it PM to the Secretary and the treasurer they both are very dependable to attending meetings. They in turn can print the PM out and it would be an official vote. Then everyone could vote VIA the internet and there would be no questions asked. The ballots would be identical and duplicated to be official. If no internet access then you need to attend the next meeting.

[94Dodge Truggy]

OK,OK,OK

Dually notes and I tend to agree also...I beleive we did it the way I said above in the past when there were not enough people that wanted the positions...I think. Heck I don't know.

Actually after posting it I did have second thoughts. uit was already posted and you know how people get when you delete things around here.:(

Any how run for one position only


if we do not have a person to run for a position then what do we do in the future? Suggestions???

Eliminate the position for the time being or allow for the previous office holder to keep their position for another term.

[carwash]

can't eliminate a position, not an option. take a volunteer or something.