[Gpca-votes] Fwd: [gpca-cc] SGA Vote Administrator procedures

Wed Jan 31 13:21:45 PST 2018

Ps.
Sadie,

What do you mean when you say that "my side" should pony-up evidence or
whatever? Are you under the impression, like many others I've heard from,
that i am on a "side?"

I speak on behalf of myself, based on my own observations and i would
encourage others to do the same, too.

-N
On Jan 31, 2018 9:56 AM, "Nicole Castor" <nmcastorsilva at gmail.com> wrote:

> Ann,
>
> The things you mention are not mutually exclusive. Quit straw-manning. Our
> internal election integrity is just as important as anything else.
>
> -N
> On Jan 31, 2018 9:53 AM, "Nicole Castor" <nmcastorsilva at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Likewise, you're relying on others to give the benefit of the doubt in
>> lieu of evidence. You claim to provide evidence, but provided none. I had
>> heard things to the contrary and there is nothing to support either
>> argument. What now? The SGA Admin transition wasn't even the real issue,
>> but just an example which was brought up to excuse undemocratic and
>> exclusionary behavior of the new SGA admins in their handling of the last
>> vote. As a result, statistics and percentages are not valid and if cited,
>> they should be noted as incomplete.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 31, 2018 9:45 AM, "Sadie Fulton" <sadie.fulton at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Nicole, you are not expressing dissent anymore, you are exploiting a
>>> strategic lack of paper trail in order to gaslight the entire listserv. In
>>> a court of law,  testimonies from a wide variety of witnesses are usually
>>> adequate for sentencing. Its time your side ponied up a bit more solid
>>> evidence of your claims instead of one person asserting their
>>> "understanding".
>>>
>>> You can assert that I and the others on this listserv are liars if you
>>> want to. I will testify under oath if that's what's needed of me.
>>> Sadie
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018, 09:32 Nicole Castor <nmcastorsilva at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bob and others,
>>>>
>>>> Bob is entitled to an opinion, but should never speak on behalf of
>>>> others.
>>>>
>>>> I have every right to address these issues as they are completely
>>>> relevant to the upcoming SGA voting period.
>>>>
>>>> The responses I've seen from the so-called "reformers" are weak,
>>>> non-evidence to excuse their undemocratic and exclusionary practices in
>>>> handing the previous vote.
>>>>
>>>> For the delegates set to participate, let this be a beacon to any who
>>>> may have had doubts or opinions which might not align with the GPCA status
>>>> quo- showing that they are not alone.
>>>>
>>>> -N
>>>>
>>>> PS. It's only a waste of time when it's dissent, huh? Maintaining
>>>> integrity in our values & purpose is never a waste of time.
>>>> On Jan 31, 2018 9:10 AM, "Bob Marsh" <bob at marsh.name> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Nicole has wasted enough of my time (and all of yours as well, I'm
>>>>> sure) so I'm giving her a coveted spot on my "delete immediately" email
>>>>> list... poof! gone.
>>>>>
>>>>> cheers,
>>>>> Bob
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 9:01 AM, Nicole Castor <
>>>>> nmcastorsilva at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> What evidence is this exactly? That someone sent a request? I see no
>>>>>> reply explaining a refusal to comply. How are we to know phone calls
>>>>>> weren't made or that SGA admins other than Laura weren't contacted
>>>>>> separately? It is my understanding that Brian Good was contacted, although
>>>>>> this could be wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If there is no actual evidence to indicate the claims which have been
>>>>>> stated, the argument should cease.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This still does not address my original concern that the statistics
>>>>>> of the SGA vote are not valid. The reason for this is that the voting was
>>>>>> not completed since some SGA delegates were cut off three hours prior to
>>>>>> the deadline. It makes no difference whether or not these delegates
>>>>>> "agreed" to forfeit their votes. The point is- it affects the percentages
>>>>>> in the results. Therefore, if someone out there was citing these
>>>>>> percentages for whatever reason- the numbers would not be accurate.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wish i had mentioned it when it happened, but i mention now because
>>>>>> we are approaching a new voting period and it is my hope, as it should be
>>>>>> for all others as well, that this next vote reflects more integrity in the
>>>>>> values we claim to uphold.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -N
>>>>>> On Jan 31, 2018 7:36 AM, "Sadie Fulton" <sadie.fulton at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The attached email is evidence of the new SGA administrators
>>>>>>> reaching out to the outgoing ones, requesting access and training. This is
>>>>>>> direct evidence against Nicole's claim that outreach was made in the other
>>>>>>> direction and refused.
>>>>>>> No response was ever received for this email. If the claim that Tim
>>>>>>> and Mike were willing to train the new SGA administrators back in September
>>>>>>> when the request was made is to hold any water henceforth, let's see
>>>>>>> your evidence.
>>>>>>> Sadie
>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>>>>>> From: Laura Wells <laurawells510 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Date: Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 11:34
>>>>>>> Subject: [gpca-cc] SGA Vote Administrator procedures
>>>>>>> To: GPCA Coordinating Committee <gpca-cc at lists.cagreens.org>
>>>>>>> Cc: Tim Laidman <timlaidman at yahoo.com>, Brian Good <
>>>>>>> snug.bug at hotmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *[This list of questions is going especially to long-time SGA Vote
>>>>>>> Administrators Mike Feinstein and Tim Laidman; to all CC members; and to
>>>>>>> Brian Good, a newly elected admin who is not on the CC.] *
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello all —
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now that we have a roster of 5 new SGA Vote Administrators (Victoria
>>>>>>> Ashley, Brian Good, Laura Wells), and 2 alternates (Eric Brooks and Mike
>>>>>>> Goldbeck), we need to get trained and up-to-speed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please reply with whatever help you can provide.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here is a starter list of questions that will allow us to create
>>>>>>> procedures, a process for gaining access to the system, and training needed
>>>>>>> by the incoming SGA Vote Administrators. The last question applies to
>>>>>>> almost all of the others: who performs each of the tasks now, and
>>>>>>> who can provide the new admins with access to each of the processes?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (1) How is the list of SGA delegates updated?
>>>>>>> http://sga.cagreens.org/vote/contacts?cid=13
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (2) How are SGA delegates added to the SGA email list,
>>>>>>> gpca-votes at cagreens.org (or gpca-votes at lists.cagreens.org)?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (3) How are SGA delegates added to the SGA voting pages/voting
>>>>>>> system?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (4) How do proposal pages get published on the website?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (5) How do candidate lists get published on the website? How do
>>>>>>> candidate applications/bios get published and updated?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (6) How are the SGA announcements set up? Announcements include the
>>>>>>> beginning of the discussion and voting periods, the upcoming end of the
>>>>>>> voting period, and the ending of the voting period.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (7) How are the results announced for yes/no votes and for ranked
>>>>>>> choice votes?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (8) Who does each of the above, and who can provide the new admins
>>>>>>> with access to each of the above?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (9) What else should be included on this list of questions?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> NOTE that in researching the GP-US voting system, it appears that
>>>>>>> “Vote Administrators” are called “Floor Managers” and the job rotates among
>>>>>>> the Steering Committee members, with some duties performed by the Secretary
>>>>>>> of the Steering Committee. The system was described as a process of filling
>>>>>>> out (“plugging in”) the software forms online: checking boxes for kind of
>>>>>>> vote, discussion period, listing candidates; and pasting in proposals,
>>>>>>> background, resources required, references. It’s possible that the CA
>>>>>>> system, which apparently was originally based on the same system as the
>>>>>>> national, may have become more complicated over the years, but still
>>>>>>> do-able by people who are not necessarily highly technical.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you all.
>>>>>>> Laura Wells
>>>>>>> CC member and one of the newly-elected SGA Vote Administrators
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> gpca-cc mailing list
>>>>>>> gpca-cc at lists.cagreens.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.cagreens.org/listinfo/gpca-cc_lists.cagreens.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> gpca-votes mailing list
>>>>>>> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>>>>>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> gpca-votes mailing list
>>>>>> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>>>>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> gpca-votes mailing list
>>>>> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>>>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> gpca-votes mailing list
>>>> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> gpca-votes mailing list
>>> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.sfgreens.org/pipermail/gpca-votes/attachments/20180131/bad10dbb/attachment-0001.html>