To stay for a moment on the technical sides:
Yes, I agree - not bad overall. Many of these problems could have been solved, however, by some of the following precautions:
1. Telling people in advance to check that their SqP account is certified, has a current email address, and a full name (the last should be a requirement to voting). 2. Getting the SqP list from Ken with full names and certifications as well as emails. Makes dealing with missing emails more likely. 3. Sending mails to all SqP accounts mentioning the elections - both to awaken observers that may have done more since, and to get the bounces earlier.
While sending people ballots manually was critical this time, we should try to avoid it in general, since malicious voters might use it to vote twice.
On other fronts, I was happy we had lots of candidates and less than thrilled about the level of conversation that developed between candidates and voters. I think that while it isn't our role to guide the discussion, we do need to do something to have more meaningful platform statements. I think we should probably have this part of the discussion on squeak-dev, though.
Daniel Vainsencher
Ron Teitelbaum wrote:
All,
Here's a quick summary of what happened in our election
Server error 1 user reported
Wrong Email in Squeak People 5 users New email added ballots resent
Ineligible voters requesting ballot 2 users
Couldn't find Email 3 users 2 resent (1 found by user)
Bounces 12 emails bounced
Issues: 0-10 emails were not on squeakPeople export Numbers on front page are wrong Should be:
Observer 96 Apprentice 245 Journeyer 118 Master 34
Total 493
I'd say it went pretty well,
Ron Teitelbaum Squeak Elections Team Member
Elections mailing list Elections@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/elections