USPSA election results...

[Dan Hefta]

I want to know how 18 people managed to mess up a ballot that only had like 4 boxes on it

These are the same people that don't fill out their score sheets properly and get put in Open/Minor... then complain about it.

[Chills1994]

Jim Norman wrote:

....Plans for real growth, we are pathetic! we have member numbers in the 70k range and only 18k members?! Look at SASS and IDPA.

At first blush, it appears that our numbers are quite low, but I reckon when or rather if IDPA or SASS would divulge their active membership numbers, theirs would be on par with USPSA's.

(and therein lies the rub....define "active membership")

we know exactly because each club has to submit $3 for each classifier score submitted.

IDPA and SASS do NOT have those same requirements. So any numbers they would be able to give us would more than likely be some sort of SWAG.

And keep in mind, USPSA...errr...IPSC has like a 20 year head start on those two other organizations. Hence, our member numbers are way higher.

Edited September 27, 2011 by Chills1994

[Chills1994]

Jim Norman also wrote:

Metric Target

Scholastic Steel

Juniors

National Dates, Locations, number of years at a location, mix

Single Stack Nationals rolled into the USPSA Nationals.

Open Revolver

Open-10

Multi-Gun

Did the 100% hit factors for the classifier stages ever get officially released by HQ?

I know there was some mention of it, IIRC, in the BoD minutes.

I know it is really old news, but I sure would like to know an official price tag for buying the Steel Challenge???

By "metric target" up above, I am ASSuming you mean the humanoid shaped target with the head....in other words, are we going to go the P.C. route like the Europeans did with IPSC?

[MarkCO]

While I see the points made for electronic voting, AND the pathetic turnout, I'm not sure it makes a lot of difference. Those who vote, WANT to vote. I went to like 8 majors matches this year and not ONCE did any of the candidates say word one about the election. Sure I read the "printed" viewpoints in FrontSight, but I wanted to see a more fluid discussion. I also went and read what ONE candidate posted in the USPSA election forum. Five people run and only one had positional statements on the offical forum. While there apparently was another who posted some (got dumped with the server crash if I recall), three had nothing, including the top two vote getters.

I talked to a few USPSA members here locally who shoot regularly, but had no idea there even was an election and now a run-off. I am not saying whose fault that would be, but it is pretty pathetic.

[Skydiver]

There is the USPSA election forum, but I think only one candidate ever put up his views on various topics:

http://www.uspsa.org/forums/index.php?showforum=78

[Chuck Anderson]

So when will the new ballots be mailed? let's all face fats here. USPSA is not about to implement a change now. Mail me my ballot and I will fill it out and return it the day I get it.

Is there going to be a place for the candidates to post their positions on the issues? I personally would like to see a 10-20 point questionnaire sent to Mike and Phil and have them answer to the membership. Not a campaign speech, but a where do I stand on...

From the Bylaws.

6.7 Runoff Election Ballot Procedure:

The run-off election shall be conducted under the terms, conditions, and procedures described in 6.5 for the initial election, except that the deadlines shall be:

i.) ballots shall be mailed to all current members on the original mailing list by November 1st, by first class mail,

ii.) ballots received on or before December 1st are eligible to be counted,

iii.) results shall be reported to the President and Board of Directors by December 15th of each election year.

As far as additional candidate comments, I'm not sure if there will be any additional in Front Sight. Probably depends on the print schedule and whether each candidate chooses to pay for an ad. I don't believe there is a provision for any additional information going out. From your list it looked like the candidates already answered most of them at one point or another. You can always email them and ask their opinions. Mike is president@uspsa.org and Phil is area4@uspsa.org They are both probably already in Greece or on their way so it might be a little while before you get a response. There is a bit of time before the ballots go out November 1 though.

[Nik Habicht]

Moverfive- I agree totally.

It just doesn't seem possible that mailing and counting etc.,etc.could be cheaper than digital.

We have secure payments to buy stuff/pay bills online, why can't we have secure voting?

The accounting end of it, while undoubtedly expensive, probably isn't prohibitively so -- because accounting firms are already set-up to perform these tasks efficiently, and at a profit, of course....

[remoandiris]

Jim Norman also wrote:

Metric Target

Scholastic Steel

Juniors

National Dates, Locations, number of years at a location, mix

Single Stack Nationals rolled into the USPSA Nationals.

Open Revolver

Open-10

Multi-Gun

Did the 100% hit factors for the classifier stages ever get officially released by HQ?

I know there was some mention of it, IIRC, in the BoD minutes.

I know it is really old news, but I sure would like to know an official price tag for buying the Steel Challenge???

By "metric target" up above, I am ASSuming you mean the humanoid shaped target with the head....in other words, are we going to go the P.C. route like the Europeans did with IPSC?

BoD has a lot of input about these issues as well, right??? Especially the target concern.

My biggest concern about any elected office is how the candidate carries themself. Are they arrogant or are they humble. Are they in it for them or in it for the Association/members. That is my litmus test. YMMV.

[Chuck Anderson]

Jim Norman also wrote:

Metric Target

Scholastic Steel

Juniors

National Dates, Locations, number of years at a location, mix

Single Stack Nationals rolled into the USPSA Nationals.

Open Revolver

Open-10

Multi-Gun

Did the 100% hit factors for the classifier stages ever get officially released by HQ?

I know there was some mention of it, IIRC, in the BoD minutes.

I know it is really old news, but I sure would like to know an official price tag for buying the Steel Challenge???

By "metric target" up above, I am ASSuming you mean the humanoid shaped target with the head....in other words, are we going to go the P.C. route like the Europeans did with IPSC?

BoD has a lot of input about these issues as well, right??? Especially the target concern.

My biggest concern about any elected office is how the candidate carries themself. Are they arrogant or are they humble. Are they in it for them or in it for the Association/members. That is my litmus test. YMMV.

With the exception of the Nationals dates/locations/formats etc. yes the BOD has a great deal of input. The President has the responsibility for the Nationals. The BOD as a whole, including the President is responsible for the rest. I will say I think everyone on the BOD at this time, and that is currently up for election has the best interests of the sport as their primary motiviation. I don't always agree with everyone, but I know they are acting for what they think is best.

[diablodawg]

There is the USPSA election forum, but I think only one candidate ever put up his views on various topics:

http://www.uspsa.org/forums/index.php?showforum=78

This is why I didn't vote. I could only find one of them that bothered to campaign.

[ima45dv8]

This topic is straying more and more to comments about the actual candidates and platform issues, rather than the mechanics of the process and the desired level of participation by voters in the run-off(s).

If that trend continues, this thread will likely be closed.

-- Friendly, unsolicited Moderator advice

[Rob Boudrie]

The accounting end of it, while undoubtedly expensive, probably isn't prohibitively so -- because accounting firms are already set-up to perform these tasks efficiently, and at a profit, of course....

Another factor - the accounting firm is one with which USPSA has an ongoing relationship, so they are fair in their dealing with us, and the election is simply something they bill USPSA for based on the time spent. Unlike some of the election companies, there is no salesman who much get paid a commission to "close the deal", and no nonsense like "not being able to do the job unless USPSA signs a multi-year contract".

What makes electronic voting difficult is guaranteeing anonymity, but at the same time guaranteeing that person only votes once.

That's not really the biggest issue - I could easily put such a system in place, but the membership would have to trust that I wasn't manipulating the results.

Stalin described the problem nicely: "He who votes decides nothing; he who counts the votes decides everything."

In order to maintain integrity of the process, we must run the election as if we don't trust ourselves. The members deserve an independent assurance that the ballots are not simply counted in the back room by persons with an interest in the outcome.

[moverfive]

Regardless of the medium, we would fully expect a CPA firm to continue certifying the accuracy of the voting results. However was this current firm, or any other firm, approached to see if they were aware of an online solution available? A system that provides the minimum controls and processes in order for them to provide confirmation on the reliability and accuracy of the voting?

Assuming there is an on-line solution available: By eliminating the costs of everything associated with preparing and then mailing out the almost 20K ballots along with the charges incurred for the extra time associated with physically receiving and tabulating the incoming ballots (versus manipulating an electronic file), is there an idea as to what that amount is? And if so, how does it compare to a potential online solution's costs?

[sperman]

Regardless of the medium, we would fully expect a CPA firm to continue certifying the accuracy of the voting results. However was this current firm, or any other firm, approached to see if they were aware of an online solution available? A system that provides the minimum controls and processes in order for them to provide confirmation on the reliability and accuracy of the voting?

Assuming there is an on-line solution available: By eliminating the costs of everything associated with preparing and then mailing out the almost 20K ballots along with the charges incurred for the extra time associated with physically receiving and tabulating the incoming ballots (versus manipulating an electronic file), is there an idea as to what that amount is? And if so, how does it compare to a potential online solution's costs?

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=136286&view=findpost&p=1537509

[moverfive]

Regardless of the medium, we would fully expect a CPA firm to continue certifying the accuracy of the voting results. However was this current firm, or any other firm, approached to see if they were aware of an online solution available? A system that provides the minimum controls and processes in order for them to provide confirmation on the reliability and accuracy of the voting?

Assuming there is an on-line solution available: By eliminating the costs of everything associated with preparing and then mailing out the almost 20K ballots along with the charges incurred for the extra time associated with physically receiving and tabulating the incoming ballots (versus manipulating an electronic file), is there an idea as to what that amount is? And if so, how does it compare to a potential online solution's costs?

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=136286&view=findpost&p=1537509

Not exactly what I was asking.....this appears to be a quote for a complete outsource and not what I was asking.

[sargenv]

The largest election we've had at our R&G club is something like 450 votes.. out of approx 1800 members... or 25%...

[Carlos]

Kind of disapointing only 28% / 30% voting.

I agree, can't they afford the few minutes to fill it out, and a stamp? Give me a break!

Indeed disappointing. My only guess is that many non-responders are members who do not participate in USPSA any more or who might have bought a membership for other reasons, like CMP/DCM qualification.

On another front: are there any announced endorsements from the candidates who did not make the run off?

[juan]

I almost did not vote.

Other than the current prez, I know nobody else,only their own sales pitch in front sight.

I would like to see more information on those running.

I would like to make a educated vote.

[hopalong]

For what it is worth, Let me tell you about the USPSA Presidential elections from my point of view.

When I decided to run, I called and talked to many people in differing parts of the US. Not just the Southeast where I live.

I went to 13 major matches in 8 states including Area-1 (long way from Tennessee) (USPSA, and 3 3-gun or Rifle matches) not just to shoot, but to meet, campaign, and just talk to other people in the US. (I worked as a range officer @ 12 of those matches).

I also posted on the USPSA election forums my positions and Intentions like Mr Meek. Unlike Mr. Meek my posts were lost in the crash and I was not able to repost due to my work after that.

I had also posted my e-mail, cell phone number so people would call or contact me. I got 6 phone calls, and 4 e-mails total.

I had good support from friends and others that know me from other people and I thank them very much for the support and well wishes.

So even if you didn't vote the first time (Shame on you) vote this time.

Hopalong

[Heckler]

I almost did not vote.

Other than the current prez, I know nobody else,only their own sales pitch in front sight.

I would like to see more information on those running.

I would like to make a educated vote.

Be nice if the candidates did a short YouTube video introducing themselves and their platform. I guess that would be allowed....

[mpolans]

I want to know how 18 people managed to mess up a ballot that only had like 4 boxes on it

I'm guessing the ballots weren't messed up, they just didn't make it in by the deadline.

[bpowe]

Still haven't seen a runoff ballot and Nov 1 (cut off date for mailing ballots back), is getting closer fast.

[Chuck Anderson]

Still haven't seen a runoff ballot and Nov 1 (cut off date for mailing ballots back), is getting closer fast.

They are supposed to be mailed to the members by Nov 1. Ballots received back by Dec 1 will count.

[Flexmoney]

Yep, as Chuck said, ballots go out at the start of November and are due back after a month. Then, we should hear the results around the 15th of December.

[wgnoyes]

Be nice if the candidates did a short YouTube video introducing themselves and their platform. I guess that would be allowed....

Phil Strader has a separate election page available at his website. Not sure if I'm allowed to directly link to it here, so I decided not to and someone else can tell me if I can.