On 24 Jan 2009, at 23:06, James Farrar wrote:

> 2009/1/24 Thomas Dalton <thomas.dal...@gmail.com>:
>> 2009/1/24 James Farrar <james.far...@gmail.com>:
>>> My past experience as a returning officer, as a candidate, and as a
>>> candidate's agent in elections suggests that allowing candidates or
>>> potential candidates a running commentary of candidates standing
>>> negatively influences the fairness of an electoral process - and  
>>> this
>>> is particularly true when only a subset of potential candidates is
>>> getting this information.
>>
>> I don't think you can keep that kind of information from the board.
>> The board are responsible for holding the AGM and running the  
>> election
>> correctly, they need to know what is going on.
>
> Then why appoint a Teller or Tellers independent of the Board?

Because the board members, if standing for re-election, have a vested  
interest in the outcome. An independent person taking the lead in the  
election helps avoid that vested interest becoming a problem. At the  
same time, the board needs to be sure that everything is going  
correctly and smoothly with the election.

That said, I can see how information on the candidates is useful to  
other candidates - for example, what goes into candidate statements.  
An alternative approach might be to do something similar to the last  
elections, having candidate statements etc. on a wiki page, although  
this would have to be done informally. Or candidate statements could  
be sent solely to the teller(s) separate from the rest of the  
information.

Mike

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l

Reply via email to