Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old June 15th 05, 01:03 AM
BrotherNehoc
 
Posts: n/a
Default NEW BALLOTS!!

An announcement was made prior to the final round at the National Open.
Due to some printing errors not all of the ballots were personalized.
As a result the USCF will be sending new ballots out to all of the
eligible voting members. This is being done via first class mail!

I guess this means that anyone who already voted has to move to
Chicago, so they can vote more than once in an election. LOL.

Best "Chess" Regards,
Larry Cohen

  #2   Report Post  
Old June 15th 05, 01:16 AM
Mike Nolan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"BrotherNehoc" writes:

An announcement was made prior to the final round at the National Open.
Due to some printing errors not all of the ballots were personalized.
As a result the USCF will be sending new ballots out to all of the
eligible voting members. This is being done via first class mail!


I guess this means that anyone who already voted has to move to
Chicago, so they can vote more than once in an election. LOL.


Naah, USCF's incorporated in Illinois so all USCF members are honorary
Chicagoans. :-)

Seriously, because USCF ballots are authenticated with the member's name
and ID (the absence of which was the primary reason for the reissuance
of ballots), we can ensure that only ballots from voting members are
counted and only one ballot is counted for any voting member.

This will be done before any ballots are open and counted.
--
Mike Nolan


  #3   Report Post  
Old June 15th 05, 02:04 AM
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mike, since the ballot error was the fault of the printing company,
are they paying for this first class mailing of new ballots? If not,
are they making some other concession to compensate USCF for the cost?

-- Hal Terrie

Mike Nolan wrote:
"BrotherNehoc" writes:

An announcement was made prior to the final round at the National Open.
Due to some printing errors not all of the ballots were personalized.
As a result the USCF will be sending new ballots out to all of the
eligible voting members. This is being done via first class mail!


I guess this means that anyone who already voted has to move to
Chicago, so they can vote more than once in an election. LOL.


Naah, USCF's incorporated in Illinois so all USCF members are honorary
Chicagoans. :-)

Seriously, because USCF ballots are authenticated with the member's name
and ID (the absence of which was the primary reason for the reissuance
of ballots), we can ensure that only ballots from voting members are
counted and only one ballot is counted for any voting member.

This will be done before any ballots are open and counted.
--
Mike Nolan


  #7   Report Post  
Old June 15th 05, 02:03 PM
Member
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2005
Posts: 30
Default

This all sounds like the table is being set for some good old fashioned election fraud. I can't believe this kind of idiocy goes on. Who is responsible for proofing the election ballot? I've worked in printing and know that the printer always submits a proof for approval before running a job like this. The responsibility for this gaffe is firmly in the lap of some USCF official(s).
  #8   Report Post  
Old June 15th 05, 02:32 PM
George John
 
Posts: n/a
Default

My understanding is at least a majority of the ballots were fine (mine
is fine). This sounds like a printer problem to me unless the data
sent to the printer was flawed, which I think unlikely.

Best regards,

George John

  #9   Report Post  
Old June 15th 05, 03:16 PM
[email protected]
 
Posts: n/a
Default



George John wrote:
My understanding is at least a majority of the ballots were fine (mine
is fine). This sounds like a printer problem to me unless the data
sent to the printer was flawed, which I think unlikely.

Best regards,

George John


Yes everyone involves recognizes it is aprinter problem including the
printer.

What apparently happened is the following:

The address label on the outside of the magazine and the printing of
the verification data on the ballot inside the magazine are done
almost simultaneously from two separate ink printing nozzles. During
the printing of something less than 5,000 magazines the print nozzle
that is suppose to print on the ballot was apparently turned away at a
90 degree angle.

We have a situation that is totally apolitical. It is being resolved by
consensus with Beatriz and I in full agreement. The USCF attorney is
involved, as is our new ED Bill Hall, Acting CL editor Gerry Dullea,
just returning from medical leave Glenn Petersen, Mike Nolan etc.
Solving this problem has been a team effort.

I'll see that more information is published as soon as possible - we
are bit reluctant to release approcahes before they are cast in
concrete since that adds to the complexity of solving the problem if we
go down a different path.

But everyone will get a ballot and all details will be worked out in
short order. Thanks for your understanding.

Regards,
Don Schultz

  #10   Report Post  
Old June 15th 05, 03:33 PM
[email protected]
 
Posts: n/a
Default



wrote:
George John wrote:
My understanding is at least a majority of the ballots were fine (mine
is fine). This sounds like a printer problem to me unless the data
sent to the printer was flawed, which I think unlikely.

Best regards,

George John


Yes everyone involves recognizes it is aprinter problem including the
printer.

What apparently happened is the following:

The address label on the outside of the magazine and the printing of
the verification data on the ballot inside the magazine are done
almost simultaneously from two separate ink printing nozzles. During
the printing of something less than 5,000 magazines the print nozzle
that is suppose to print on the ballot was apparently turned away at a
90 degree angle.

We have a situation that is totally apolitical. It is being resolved by
consensus with Beatriz and I in full agreement. The USCF attorney is
involved, as is our new ED Bill Hall, Acting CL editor Gerry Dullea,
just returning from medical leave Glenn Petersen, Mike Nolan etc.
Solving this problem has been a team effort.

I'll see that more information is published as soon as possible - we
are bit reluctant to release approcahes before they are cast in
concrete since that adds to the complexity of solving the problem if we
go down a different path.

But everyone will get a ballot and all details will be worked out in
short order. Thanks for your understanding.

Regards,
Don Schultz


Don:

Same question I posed to Mike Nolan - since the ballot error
was the fault of the printing company, are they paying for
this first class mailing of new ballots? If not, are they
making some other concession to compensate USCF for the cost?

-- Hal Terrie

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
13 people used to count ballots in USCF election Miriling rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 43 July 30th 04 04:35 AM
Ballots? Duncan Oxley rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 6 July 21st 04 03:45 AM
OMOV election: 1822 ballots Recmate rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 14 August 26th 03 06:47 AM
I would like to see a ballot count for the 60 late ballots Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 5 July 23rd 03 03:35 AM
I would like to see a ballot count for the 60 late ballots Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 4 July 23rd 03 03:35 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:30 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017