Cycling UK Forum

.

gaz[u] wrote: Results from the Returning Officer, here. I believe I have transposed them correctly but I will be pleased to correct any error.

Thanks for that link, which I hadn't spotted before.

So, far more people, who wanted to direct someone to vote against, instructed to Chair to vote against than instructed one of the Save the CTC reps. I wonder why - did they worry that the CTC might waylay Greg et al on the way there and prevent them from physically being present, or did they just fancy the satisfaction of forcing the Chair to cast some votes against his own proposal? (I suppose, realistically, it was just the easiest course of action!)

And a few hundred people apparently cast definite "no" votes against 8, but left it discretionary for 9 and 10. Were they people who thought that 8 was a bad idea, but that if 8 was passed, the best thing was to allow the wish of the majority to prevail by passing 10 as well?

So, far more people, who wanted to direct someone to vote against, instructed to Chair to vote against than instructed one of the Save the CTC reps. I wonder why - did they worry that the CTC might waylay Greg et al on the way there and prevent them from physically being present, or did they just fancy the satisfaction of forcing the Chair to cast some votes against his own proposal? (I suppose, realistically, it was just the easiest course of action!)

It may be that for some at least, the choice to vote 'no' was not influenced by any contact with SaveTheCTC.

swansonj wrote:And a few hundred people apparently cast definite "no" votes against 8, but left it discretionary for 9 and 10. Were they people who thought that 8 was a bad idea, but that if 8 was passed, the best thing was to allow the wish of the majority to prevail by passing 10 as well?

I didn't realise that 10 was the big 75% one, I thought that 9&10 were just book-keeping from 8. So I figured that if 8 was passed we might as well do it properly. Apparently I was not alone.

Next chance I will vote no, no, no.

Actualy I sent in a proxy vote for the 'NO' camp. I did not read the blurb much put out by the 'NO' crowd but did not like the stuff shoved into my face in the magazine by the 'YES' lot! I just want a CTC that looks after the ordinary cyclist without having to pay a 'arm and a leg' for it!....I would have hoped that my vote was used as I intended to be?? (I am amazed by the way that anybody can pay 38 pounds subscription for so little return....)