On Dec 1, 2011, at 8:47 AM, Ross Singer wrote:

> I am absolutely opposed to:
> 
> 1) Setting weights on voting.  0 is just as valid a vote as 3.
> 2) Publicly shaming the offenders in Code4Lib.  If you run across
> impropriety in a forum, make a friendly, yet firm, reminder that
> ballot stuffing is unethical, undemocratic and tears at the fabric
> that is Code4Lib.  Sometimes it just takes a simple reminder for
> people to realize what they're doing is wrong (it certainly works for
> me).

Good point, forums are public, too. 'Nuff said. :) 

> 3) Selection committees.  We are, as Dre points out,
> anarcho-democratic as our core.  anarcho-bureaucratic just sounds
> silly.

Even though I suggested it, I am also ambivalent about it. Selection committees can often seem arbitrary, but then so is rigging an election. :) 

> This current situation is largely our doing.  We even publicly said
> that "getting your proposal voted in is the backdoor into the
> conference".  The first allotment of spaces sold out in an hour.  This
> is, literally, the only way that a person that was not able to
> register and is buried on the wait list is going to get in.  And we've
> basically told them that.

I agree with this sentiment, too. But I feel that if someone wanted votes for their talk, they could have campaigned on this very mailing list. 

"Hey, I was REALLY hoping to go, but I was in a confounded meeting all morning and missed registration! P-p-p-lease vote for my talk so I can go! I promise I'll bring cookies and pictures of monkeys and robots." 

Maybe it would have worked, but we'll never know. Nor will we be certain to have pictures of monkeys and robots. 

> One thing I would be open to is to put a disclaimer splash page before
> any ballot (only to be seen the first time a person votes) briefly
> explaining how the ballot works and to mention that ballot stuffing is
> "unethical, undemocratic and tears at the fabric that is Code4Lib" or
> some such.  I would welcome contributions to the wording.
> 
> What would people think about that?

+1. Nothing wrong with gentle reminders.

I feel this whole situation has tainted things somewhat. :(

--Joel