Incorrect Ballot Papers
Incorrect Ballot Papers
Alongside the issue that ballot papers can be linked to individuals (and the potential that this may affect the way people vote) there appears to be problems with the accuracy of the ballot papers.
People here have mentioned issues. These have included people who are eligible to vote being omitted, people being given more than one vote and people who are unknown to the member appearing on ballot papers.
A quick'n'dirty survey was held elsewhere and of the 14 responses, 4 (or 30%) of the ballot papers were wrong.
This isn't looking good
People here have mentioned issues. These have included people who are eligible to vote being omitted, people being given more than one vote and people who are unknown to the member appearing on ballot papers.
A quick'n'dirty survey was held elsewhere and of the 14 responses, 4 (or 30%) of the ballot papers were wrong.
This isn't looking good
Re: Incorrect Ballot Papers
Is there somewhere where incorrect ballot papers can be logged, just in case producing evidence should be necessary at some future point?
Re: Incorrect Ballot Papers
swansonj wrote:Is there somewhere where incorrect ballot papers can be logged, just in case producing evidence should be necessary at some future point?
Why not log them on this thread?
Re: Incorrect Ballot Papers
Regulator wrote: Why not log them on this thread?
OK. In my case, family membership with four named individuals, ballot paper had five boxes, four names correct then one of them repeated.
Re: Incorrect Ballot Papers
OK, as logged elsewhere. Ballot paper with five names. Should have been three.
Three correct, one repeated, one other name not resident at the address.
Correct paper requested for purposes of participating in the vote.
Edit - Now requested again from the correct e-mail at NO.
Three correct, one repeated, one other name not resident at the address.
Correct paper requested for purposes of participating in the vote.
Edit - Now requested again from the correct e-mail at NO.
Last edited by gaz on 1 Dec 2010, 9:27pm, edited 1 time in total.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:18pm
- Location: Greater Manchester
Re: Incorrect Ballot Papers
Regulator wrote:swansonj wrote:Is there somewhere where incorrect ballot papers can be logged, just in case producing evidence should be necessary at some future point?
Why not log them on this thread?
Are the ballot papers supposed to have the membership numbers on or just the name?
The two of us got a copy of Cycle each, with our own ballot paper in with just our own name on it.
I had thought, in the interests of economy, that we were meant to get just one copy of Cycle as we are both at the same address.
Initially I thought it was because we each had our own ballot paper, but I see that other households have one paper with several names on.
-
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Incorrect Ballot Papers
Karen Sutton wrote:... Are the ballot papers supposed to have the membership numbers on or just the name?...
I presume mine is standard:-
One side of mine was used as the postal address sheet for the mag itself. The other side has a letter addressed to me by name. It includes the ballot paper which takes the form of three lines across seven columns, the forst column being for the subject and the remaining six being for up to six voting members. In my case, my name appears in the correct column and the remainder are blocked out by a block of XXXXXXX in each. Under each voter's name, there are two spaces to record a vote FOR or AGAINST. There is nothing on either side of the form with a membership number.
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 29 Nov 2010, 8:47pm
Re: Incorrect Ballot Papers
<mod - comment removed - please refer to my post at the top of the section and phrase your future posts in a way not likely to wind people up> I did my own check with a number of people and the the papers were correct
- Yorkshireman
- Posts: 352
- Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 6:59am
- Location: North Hykeham, Lincoln.
- Contact:
Re: Incorrect Ballot Papers
clem the moderniser wrote:<mod - comment removed - please refer to my post at the top of the section and phrase your future posts in a way not likely to wind people up> I did my own check with a number of people and the the papers were correct
Welcome to the Forum clem the moderniser.
I don't think that there's any whingeing going on. This vote is likely to be quite important and taking that into account I (personally) think that this particular voting system appears to be less than well organized considering the number of errors re ballot papers noted on here (and YACF), not to mention the way that it's going to be run ie Who will be counting and tallying the votes? Who will verify the tally? What confidentially issues might there be ?
Colin N.
Lincolnshire is mostly flat ... but the wind is mostly in your face!
http://www.freewebs.com/yorkshireman1/
Lincolnshire is mostly flat ... but the wind is mostly in your face!
http://www.freewebs.com/yorkshireman1/
Re: Incorrect Ballot Papers
As a matter of record my ballot paper is correct.
If at first you don't succeed - cheat!!
Re: Incorrect Ballot Papers
Welcome to the forum clem.
One man's whinge is another man's passionate view.
Some people have declared their voting intentions on the forum, others may be inferred (accurately or otherwise) from their posts but not everybody who has voted "no" is affiliated to savethectc.
So far only two members have reported errors with their voting papers on this thread. I can't speak for swansonj but I'm not a part of the "no campaign", nor for that matter the "no" vote.
I expect the club to provide all members with accurate voting papers, myself included. However errors can occur. Although the results of a forum thread will not be an accurate measure, it is reasonable to consider the scale of the errors in the interests of ensuring a fair vote .
I'm pleased to hear it. Unfortunately it still doesn't alter the fact that mine is not, nor is swansonj's.
clem the moderniser wrote:<mod - comment removed - please refer to my post at the top of the section and phrase your future posts in a way not likely to wind people up>
One man's whinge is another man's passionate view.
Some people have declared their voting intentions on the forum, others may be inferred (accurately or otherwise) from their posts but not everybody who has voted "no" is affiliated to savethectc.
So far only two members have reported errors with their voting papers on this thread. I can't speak for swansonj but I'm not a part of the "no campaign", nor for that matter the "no" vote.
I expect the club to provide all members with accurate voting papers, myself included. However errors can occur. Although the results of a forum thread will not be an accurate measure, it is reasonable to consider the scale of the errors in the interests of ensuring a fair vote .
clem the moderniser wrote:I did my own check with a number of people and the the papers were correct
I'm pleased to hear it. Unfortunately it still doesn't alter the fact that mine is not, nor is swansonj's.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
- brother nathaneil
- Posts: 144
- Joined: 7 Apr 2010, 1:07pm
- Location: Bicester, Oxon
- Contact:
The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.
I'll not comment as to whether I'm "for or against" at the moment, I just wanted to ask the following question:
With 4 people in my family membership, should the fact we have 5 votes invalidate the whole process?
Perhaps I'm not alone in this, and if not could it sway the vote?
There has been no tampering other than blocking out names, as you can see, my daughter has 2 votes.
I've attached a photo of my voting paper:
With 4 people in my family membership, should the fact we have 5 votes invalidate the whole process?
Perhaps I'm not alone in this, and if not could it sway the vote?
There has been no tampering other than blocking out names, as you can see, my daughter has 2 votes.
I've attached a photo of my voting paper:
Last edited by brother nathaneil on 1 Dec 2010, 10:24am, edited 1 time in total.
Success is a journey, not a destination. The doing is often more important than the outcome ~ Arthur Ashe
http://www.5blokes-end2end.weebly.com
http://www.5blokes-end2end.weebly.com
-
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Incorrect Ballot Papers
Clem the moderniser
Welcome to the forum from me too.
On the specific issue of the ballot, as I've already posted, my own form was correct. OTOH, I've also not got stuck in the snow this morning - possibly because I'm still in my dressing gown, but that won't stop the snow being a big news item all day.
If you stick around on the forum you will soon find we are a pretty good bunch and we try to make everyone feel at home. I'm stereotyping you from your name and jumping to the conclusion that you are an experienced cyclist. Shared experience is one of our biggest resources in promoting cycling and I'm sure you have a big contribution to make. (If I'm wrong about that, sorry. )
The reaction on here to the charity proposals shows the sincere concern that a lot of us feel. If it comes across as negativity that's a pity, because you can't disagree with something without saying no. I think there is also a lot of disappointment, frustration even, that the 'official side' appears to have made such cynical use of the Club's channels of communication - perhaps the similar frustration which comes across in your post is attributable to the way the 'opposition' has so effectively exploited the internet, including this forum.
In short I hope you have joined the forum to make a longer term contribution, not just to ..... whinge.
Welcome to the forum from me too.
On the specific issue of the ballot, as I've already posted, my own form was correct. OTOH, I've also not got stuck in the snow this morning - possibly because I'm still in my dressing gown, but that won't stop the snow being a big news item all day.
If you stick around on the forum you will soon find we are a pretty good bunch and we try to make everyone feel at home. I'm stereotyping you from your name and jumping to the conclusion that you are an experienced cyclist. Shared experience is one of our biggest resources in promoting cycling and I'm sure you have a big contribution to make. (If I'm wrong about that, sorry. )
The reaction on here to the charity proposals shows the sincere concern that a lot of us feel. If it comes across as negativity that's a pity, because you can't disagree with something without saying no. I think there is also a lot of disappointment, frustration even, that the 'official side' appears to have made such cynical use of the Club's channels of communication - perhaps the similar frustration which comes across in your post is attributable to the way the 'opposition' has so effectively exploited the internet, including this forum.
In short I hope you have joined the forum to make a longer term contribution, not just to ..... whinge.
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:18pm
- Location: Greater Manchester
Re: Incorrect Ballot Papers
thirdcrank wrote:Karen Sutton wrote:... Are the ballot papers supposed to have the membership numbers on or just the name?...
I presume mine is standard:-
One side of mine was used as the postal address sheet for the mag itself. The other side has a letter addressed to me by name. It includes the ballot paper which takes the form of three lines across seven columns, the forst column being for the subject and the remaining six being for up to six voting members. In my case, my name appears in the correct column and the remainder are blocked out by a block of XXXXXXX in each. Under each voter's name, there are two spaces to record a vote FOR or AGAINST. There is nothing on either side of the form with a membership number.
Yes, mine looks like that. So does my 14 year old daughters. So it seems they are correct. They have both been posted in any case.
Re: Incorrect Ballot Papers
Any questions or problems associated with voting forms should be referred to me as Returning Officer at CTC National Office (peter.jackson@ctc.org.uk). All errors will be investigated. Replacement voting forms will be issued if necessary or appropriate.
Peter Jackson
Operations Director / Returning Officer
PLEASE NOTE: THIS POST HAS BEEN PLACED BY CTC STAFF ON BEHALF OF PETER. ANY ISSUES IN RELATION TO THE BALLOT PAPERS SHOULD BE SENT DIRECTLY TO PETER AS PER HIS REQUEST.