I suppose seconding is intended to weed out those that aren't capable of even getting 1 other vote, i.e. time wasters
Gavman wrote:azrael wrote:I suppose seconding is intended to weed out those that aren't capable of even getting 1 other vote, i.e. time wasters
What about if nominations were open and some in the last hour decided to stand, now you could question why they left it so late but if nominations are open they still have every right to put themselves forward, but with a seconder we would be saying, nope sorry you don't get to stand even though you nominated yourself in time.
it is not a large barrier, but means that one person cannot easily cause disruption like that without additional member support, and that doing so with the deliberate intention of subverting the election process requires conspiracy, which is one simple protection against misfeasance.
Gavman wrote:However I feel strongly, regardless of motives, any member eligible by the other requirements should be free to stand for an election. Even 'if' they wanted to subvert, we must acknowledge that this party is founded on democracy and therefore everyone must be given an equal chance to stand and as such it is up to the members to vote and choose if they elect an individual, bear in mind that Re-open Nominations should exist for ALL elections (even if there is only one candidate standing).
It could be perfectly possible that someone that does not participate on the forums much and is not known, decides that they wish to stand - I do not believe we should place barriers to this.
It is up to members to question and engage candidates to identify who they wish to vote for (This could end up being RON).
When you start placing unreasonable and/or unnecessary barriers to entry (Which I accept at only one supporter, this may not be seen as such) there is a fundamental clash between such barriers and principles of equality.
Gavman wrote:John, if you feel that there is anything in your post that I have not addressed (I think addressed most of it, even if indirectly by stating that it is up to voters t decide who to vote for, not for the Party to put barriers in place to prevent someone for standing as a candidate) please point it out and I will be happy to, you never know you might find that it is something that I agree with
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests