Votes for 3 candidates were not included, so my vote was not included.
- yes
- no
0
voters
I understand that you have the freedom to carry out this vote, but what is the point of voting on the results of an election?
The candidates who did not sign the board contract seemed to me to have no intention of being elected from the start. I am satisfied with this election because the people who expressed words that would move the organization forward seem to be at the top of the voting results. If there were any procedural problems, that is only an issue for the next election.
2 Likes
I’ll note that the topic title now steers for one kind of answer (“yes” if included, “no” if not included), whereas the topic text “votes for 3 candidates were not included, so my vote was not included” steers for another (“yes” for “my vote was not included”, “no” for “my vote was included”). The poll outcomes will be hard to interpret.
I will also note that this is at least in part due to the tone-policing that led to the premature closing of the prior topic. That topic could instead have been revised, as it was already getting useful community feedback.
Mark, sorry, it is too late for me to edit. I see how the body text is not entirely clear. Here is a shot at better wording:
In the published results, votes for 3 candidates were not included. I voted for one of them and my answer to this poll’s question is “no”, my vote was not included.
Yes, my note was more of a meta-comment, observing that the rash closing of the earlier topic did not really work to improve the discussion and effectively derailed it. In fact, the community guidelines recommend to avoid “Responding to a post’s tone instead of its actual content” yet the topic was closed ostensibly because of its tone.
On topic: I think quite a lot of people are curious about what happened to their votes. I am not sure we can expect these forums to provide the most open view of it. (Also given lack of response here.)