[NSRCA-discussion] Election

Sun Dec 23 09:00:49 AKST 2018

Peter, that is flawed logic.

For me it is very disturbing that there was a discussion with the BoD
regarding knowledge about the fact it was close.

This presumes there is knowledge of what the count is actually at moment,
meaning who was leading and by how many votes.

Now we are saying that it is acceptable that the actual count is known by
the BoD and not all NSRCA members and that is somehow acceptable. This is
clearly an unfair advantage and the election is NOT ethical. I don't care
who is/was leading.

Best Regards,

Larry Diamond

From: Vogel, Peter [mailto:Peter_Vogel at intuit.com] 
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2018 10:40 AM
To: davel322 at comcast.net; 'Cliff Bradford' <cliff357b at gmail.com>; 'General
pattern discussion' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>; 'Larry Diamond'
<ldiamond at diamondrc.com>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Election

I would agree with you if that were the case Dave, but...

Disclaimer: I was not at the board meeting in question however...

If the knowledge that "the vote is very close" had been kept secret to the
board, THEN we would have an ethics issue as it would allow the incumbent
candidate to sway things.  However, the action the board took was to tell
*everyone* via this list, district lists, AND Facebook "the vote is close,
voting closes on Dec 31st" to encourage participation of the entire
membership.  In my mind that's not trying to sway the vote as it is telling
everyone the same thing, regardless of which candidate they support. 

Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef> 

  _____  

From: NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org> > on behalf of davel322---
via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> >
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2018 8:23 AM
To: 'Cliff Bradford'; 'General pattern discussion'; 'Larry Diamond'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Election 

This email is from an external sender. 

If one candidate is aware of the vote count, and another candidate is not
aware of the vote count, is that fair?  Does one candidate have an
advantage?

If one candidate has an unfair advantage due to structural administrative
process/error...the election is tainted.

Regards,

Dave

From: NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org> > On Behalf Of Cliff
Bradford via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2018 10:25 AM
To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> >; Larry Diamond
<ldiamond at diamondrc.com <mailto:ldiamond at diamondrc.com> >
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Election

There are only 410 nsrca members, voting electronically assures you must be
logged in and can only vote once. I'm sure any mail in ballots will be
verified for membership and authenticity. As long as we don't receive 411 or
more ballots I see no issue. 

I think it is the boards duty to keep track of the election process. To
think that it's possibe to sway the election by knowing its a close election
is silly. In fact it may incourage a higher participation percentage and
that is all good. 

The board cannot change the ballots.

We are a very small group and getting smaller because of things like this.
I'm good with the election as it stands, if the board caves to the peer
pressure and tosses this one, it would not change my vote. Would it change
yours?  That would be more damaging than the board discussion about how
close the election was. 

Perhaps we should contact the FBI to investigate any possible
consequences!!!

On Sun, Dec 23, 2018 at 8:07 AM Larry Diamond via NSRCA-discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> wrote:

Almost feels like a lynching of the election.

If the real time vote tallies were not compromised, would everyone still
think the Election should be voided? I would not. However, we may still have
an integrity or ethics issue the BoD needs to deal with it, if a BoD member
made such a comment as it is reckless to imply knowledge of the ongoing
results. If it was not a BoD member that made the comment, then freedom of
speech prevails and it's a non-issue.

We need to know the facts. The BoD needs to take control and investigate it.
If the facts are that the count was compromised, then the results should be
voided and a new voting period began.

Best Regards,

Larry Diamond

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org> ] On Behalf Of Ken Dunlap
via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2018 8:08 AM
To: David Harmon <k6xyz at sbcglobal.net <mailto:k6xyz at sbcglobal.net> >;
General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> >
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Election

+1

This is wrong at so many levels. Let's void this election. You just don't
start tallying ballots before the election closes. 

Ken Dunlap 

Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef> 

  _____  

From: NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org> > on behalf of David
Harmon via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> >
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2018 11:07:03 PM
To: 'General pattern discussion'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Election 

Plus 2 or 3 or 16...jeeeze.

David Harmon

NSRCA 586

AMA 5053

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of Jon Bruml via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2018 9:54 PM
To: Pete Cosky <pcosky at comcast.net <mailto:pcosky at comcast.net> >; Frackowiak
Tony <frackowiak at sbcglobal.net <mailto:frackowiak at sbcglobal.net> >; General
pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> >
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Election

Yes agreed 

We will have to nullify the election and start a new process 

Jonathan Bruml

Techstyles

www.techstyles.com
<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.techst
yles.com&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc417d0380fc94894a51508d66894835c%7C84df9e7fe9f640
afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636811384401721519&sdata=8YtFAcPkiKTqJ6VMIogt9G
D3FIjqTYG9ijvYvIOFD%2FI%3D&reserved=0> 

  _____  

From: NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org> > on behalf of Pete Cosky
via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> >
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2018 7:52 PM
To: Frackowiak Tony; General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Election 

It may be the end of days because I agree with Frak.  

There is absolutely no reason why the data should have been available let
alone discussed.  

The big question now is how do we recover? 

Sent from my mobile device

On Dec 22, 2018, at 9:52 PM, Frackowiak Tony via NSRCA-discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> wrote:

I'm sorry that you don't see the impropriety here. You have an incumbent
officer running for re-election able to see just how close the election is
and then being able to drum up more votes for himself. 

This election is now tainted. No one should be able to see the vote tally
before the voting period has ended. The election should be nullified, the
party or parties involved in releasing the vote tally prior to the
conclusion of voting should be censured and removed from the process. The
election should be held again and the voting results sent to an outside
party. After the end of their normal term no decisions should be made by the
BOD until a proper election can be held and the newly elected officers
installed.

Should we as NSRCA members not be allowed a fair election?

Tony Frackowiak

On Dec 22, 2018, at 5:41 PM, Monte Richard <mrichard at compassengineering.com
<mailto:mrichard at compassengineering.com> > wrote:

The discussion was centered around the fact that the voting was close to
encourage the district Vice Presidents to encourage the members in their
districts to cast their votes. It appears to have worked as this election
looks like it will have the highest voter turnout in NSRCA history.
Certainly a lot higher then the previous election which only had a voter
turnout of 12 members.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 22, 2018, at 6:09 PM, Tony Frackowiak via NSRCA-discussion <
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrcaorg>
wrote:

I was looking at the minutes of the December 12th NSRCA BOD meeting. During
that meeting according to the minutes there was a discussion about the
current vote count in the election.  

Isn't voting open until the end of the month?  And isn't there a longer time
for mailed in ballots to be received? Why are the votes being tallied and
discussed by the Board before the end of the voting period?

That is highly unethical and smacks of voting fraud. At the very least it
sounds like an attempt to influence the results. 

I will await a reply. 

Tony Frackowiak 

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
 <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org

<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.nsrc
a.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fnsrca-discussion&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc417d0380fc9
4894a51508d66894835c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C6368113844
01721519&sdata=8j%2BjZJQx3EK3OhjJQARvsxSpfDsfq7oHH9dMIvsZi2A%3D&reserved=0>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

(c) 2018 Compass Engineering & Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. This
electronic transmission, and any attachments hereto, is intended only for
the use of each individual recipient named above and may contain information
belonging to the sender that is confidential, proprietary, is subject to
copyright, constitutes a trade secret or is legally privileged. If you are
not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the
contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this transmission in error, please immediately (i) notify the sender, (ii)
permanently delete the original and all copies of this electronic
transmission and all attachments hereto, and (iii) destroy all printouts of
this electronic transmission and all attachments hereto. Please note that
electronic transmissions to and from the sender may be monitored by the
sender's employer. Thank you for your cooperation.  --  

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> 
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.nsrc
a.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fnsrca-discussion&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc417d0380fc9
4894a51508d66894835c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C6368113844
01721519&sdata=8j%2BjZJQx3EK3OhjJQARvsxSpfDsfq7oHH9dMIvsZi2A%3D&reserved=0> 

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> 
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

-- 

Cliff

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20181223/0ce685d7/attachment.html>