Originally Posted by joset2

I really cannot buy the difference of margin of votes between the second count where Azim was declared as the winner and the thurd count where jeremy came back once again.
.

Ryan clearly stated in his article that the EC realized that they had made a mistake in their recount and so ordered another recount to fix their mistake. That is why there was such a big difference between the counts. There is always a margin for human error. How many times have you been counting something and realized that you'd skipped a number or two? Or that you'd completely lost count completely? Now imagine counting hundreds of ballots for hours. Of course there is going to be error, but they realized it and held themselves accountable for it by recounting them.

Originally Posted by joset2

The issue here is not about the candidates but the way MSU is holding the counts
.

I must point out that had Joel Leavitt been able to manage his campaign team and not been disqualified we wouldn't have reached this point in the first place. I'm not pointing the finger just at Joel, but you can't blame the MSU and the EC for the actions of a candidate and his team. Like I said earlier, there needs to be a margin for human error.
On that note, perhaps the next MSU President should look into having our elections done online. If Mohawk can do it why not Mac?

Originally Posted by AfroMaestro

nicely done, Ryan Moran. a fine read
i'm ready to go re-vote for JJones....whens this next one at?

There is no re-election. They are re-counting the votes, since Joel's disqualification has been removed.

Originally Posted by kokosas

On that note, perhaps the next MSU President should look into having our elections done online. If Mohawk can do it why not Mac?

Incidentally that is already in the works. I have heard personally from members of MSU BOD that they are personally looking into a new MSU website and options for online voting. However the problems in that are immense. There is no such thing as a fully secure system, as the American systems have shown us so well. I personally think that we as students are just lazy if we think an online system will solve this. It's not about that, its about uncomplicating the election process and outlining the procedure that should be taken if a candidate with a number of votes as high as Joel's is disqualified.

Laurier had a similar situation where a candidate who had a large share of the votes was disqualified and they had a re-election two weeks later. Granted, they did not work on a preferential system, but if the SRA elects to change the process, they should look into standardising procedures for instances like that. I personally feel that if the Poll Clerks took their jobs a bit more seriously and understood the process better, they would have been able to deal with the problems with process misunderstanding a lot better. This is nothing on the CRO/DRO, because some clerks do things their own way. Take the case of the SRA elections and the science polling station clerk who was on her phone while a large line was at the table. I understand that it is very hard for the returning officer to find clerks ready to contribute time, but people who take on the job need to treat it as such.

To Joel, Ryan's comments don't seem unduly harsh towards you, and you, as well as anyone, know your friends and things they are capable doing. Granted, such accusations might be false, but only the EC and you understand the situation well enough to understand which accusations against you might have been caused by your campaign team, and what were caused by others. At the same time, I am personally happy that you are back in the race. I would find it pretty tragic to have a president whose campaign was built on the tenets of funnel cake and the Soulja Boy song, and one who showed such callous disregard for intelligence with the most conentuous Facebook known to McMaster.

Good luck to you and Azim, both of whom were in the top 2 of my ballot.

A pathetic attempt by another lame-duck MSU president to reconcile the issues surrounding the university community. Let's just save ourselves the embarrassment and turn a blind eye to this issue as we do to all others of serious importance.

Originally Posted by pattyking18

A pathetic attempt by another lame-duck MSU president to reconcile the issues surrounding the university community. Let's just save ourselves the embarrassment and turn a blind eye to this issue as we do to all others of serious importance.

I trust you can back that up with a concise set of steps that you believe that said lame-duck president should take to address the issues in a manner which leaves you oh so satisfied?

If not, comments like yours expemplify the prevalence of people in this school who love to make vague comments without any true justification. It's well and good that you have proper grammar and spelling skills, and can give the impression that you have a semblance of decent rhetoric, but your comment is hollow and meaningless.

pattyking18, why do you use the term 'lame-duck'? It's defined as "officials [...] in the peculiar position of not facing the consequences of their actions in the next election, meaning they are generally considered not accountable for their actions."

@Pattyking18 please make note of Section 5 of the MacInsiders terms of use. Thank you.

I think that everyone just needs to put it all behind them and look forward to the next recount with joel's ballots. Everything that has happened up till now is irrelevant now, get over it!!

Ryan's comments aside, the big positive thing here is that Ryan is openly communicating with us, the students! It is nice to actually see some open communication going on here and letting students reply. Well done.

Originally Posted by laura.m

Ryan's comments aside, the big positive thing here is that Ryan is openly communicating with us, the students! It is nice to actually see some open communication going on here and letting students reply. Well done.

Totally agree with you Laura, if the MSU just came out and said something like this earlier there wouldn't have been such a controversy. I think it's a little on the late side, but still good to see...

"... i think you are a great guy and I have a great deal of respect for you ..."

While I do appreciate Ryan's attempt at clarifying issues and maybe even offering some sort of an apology for the whole election mess, I do not feel that comments such as the one quoted above are true.

While there might not have been any bias against Joel Leavitt at the beginning of the election process, it was definitely there by the end. I myself have witnessed it and was pretty much in dismay.

Is there a code of conduct on the behaviour of current MSU officials during elections of the next year's president?

Wow, I had heard there were strong levels of unfair bias amongst members of the elections committee against certain candidiates, but I expected more from people appointed into such positions.

This is only really goes to shed reason on the huge variation in the time needed to discuss the fines of Joel Leavitt. 13 vs 2 hrs of time required to deliberate. Is it standard procedure that during a fines discussion that is supposed to discuss "campaign violations", of which I imagine can only occur during the campaign period or prior to if it is directly related, a thorough background check on a candidate was required? Ryan had noted this time as the time required to have "discussions with judicial affairs, meetings with the Ombuds office, and calls to security services". Was security services really needed ? And if so, what did they do ? Provide you with video footage of Joel Leavitt taking down other candidates posters ? Seems unlikely, as hard evidence such as that would not have allowed for the EAB to easily overthrow the disqualification. I'd imagine that when candidates are nominated to actually run for president that a deep search into their McMaster Student Lives would be needed, not once it was realised that said candidate might have a really good chance of stopping a worrisome trend amongst students in the MSU, a trend of internal recruitment. So really then CEO Moran, it seems like members of your elections committee was searching desperately for reasons to disqualify a candidate that judgement had already been laid upon.

I'd also like to point out that the DRO, Morganne King Wale was present at the appeal meeting with the EAB as the official representitive of the election committee's case against Joel Leavitt. I dont see why the large amounts of evidence couldn't be "properly" presented to the appeals board. I in no way see this as a fault of the board, but as a fault of the DRO either not being prepared or not having any real evidence at all.

The entire process reeks of unfair bias towards candidates and I strongly believe an inquiry into this matter should be held.

I'm truly unproud that as a student body we may have allowed for such gross underminings of ethics and principles.

Jockamo the MSU said they were going to release the minutes of the hearing so you'll soon be able to see everything they presented

END THE SHAME!

DUGDALE: DEAR LEADER FOR LIFE

Brought to you by the people who are Matt Dugdale