Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2014 21:10:05 GMT
The Psephologists Association I'd go for that one. The definite article gives it a formality, the The Local Govermnent Association, The Association of Electoral Administrators, etc. Oh, you've gone back to non-aligned already? I might start a thread soon to discuss and vote for a name. If Kris so wishes he can move it to a new sub-forum. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,759 
|
Post by J.G.Harston on May 27, 2014 22:53:25 GMT
I'd go for that one. The definite article gives it a formality, the The Local Govermnent Association, The Association of Electoral Administrators, etc. Oh, you've gone back to non-aligned already? I was approached to stand when the double vacancy was announced, and I said on here I'd take an alignment for the election, and only keep it if elected. I've gone back to working on the ward boundary review which is more important to me than a political alignment, and I don't want to get dragged into a particular position. I'm currently FTPing a load of draft maps right now. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2014 8:45:38 GMT
What have I missed? What have I got wrong, or worded badly?
|
|
|
|
Post by AdminSTB on May 28, 2014 10:08:14 GMT
Let me know when you've got a definite name, and I'll set up a sub-forum for you somewhere.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2014 10:37:22 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2014 10:56:59 GMT
Membership:
There has been a suggestion of membership fees by someone on this or the name thread. There are two real reasons for memebership fees: either to act as a threshold to make sure that only non-frivolous applicants join, or to use to fund activities.
I'm not sure the latter is going to apply, and I'm not keen on the former, as I think there are better ways of doing it.
I am a member of a Shakespeare discussion group called Shaksper. It includes professonals and amateurs, and has no membership fee, but is run as a labour of love by a US academic. Anyone can ask to be included, and you merely have to evidence your interest in the subject. I'd envisage something similar with this: anyone who posts regularly here or elsewhere with a degree of knowledge should be allowed in by the 'gatekeeper', or who has a professional interest, such as national party agents, otr who we deem worthy of inviting.
Officers:
Honorary President
Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Secretary
Treasurer not necessary
Regional/National Officers for the regions and nations (Scotland, Wales, NI): would be our lead speakers in those regions, as it's potentially too big for one person to deal with the whole lot in terms of correspondence with councils, etc..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2014 11:21:03 GMT
Membership: There has been a suggestion of membership fees by someone on this or the name thread. There are two real reasons for memebership fees: either to act as a threshold to make sure that only non-frivolous applicants join, or to use to fund activities. I'm not sure the latter is going to apply, and I'm not keen on the former, as I think there are better ways of doing it. I am a member of a Shakespeare discussion group called Shaksper. It includes professonals and amateurs, and has no membership fee, but is run as a labour of love by a US academic. Anyone can ask to be included, and you merely have to evidence your interest in the subject. I'd envisage something similar with this: anyone who posts regularly here or elsewhere with a degree of knowledge should be allowed in by the 'gatekeeper', or who has a professional interest, such as national party agents, otr who we deem worthy of inviting. Officers: Honorary President Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Secretary Treasurer not necessary Regional/National Officers for the regions and nations (Scotland, Wales, NI): would be our lead speakers in those regions, as it's potentially too big for one person to deal with the whole lot in terms of correspondence with councils, etc.. Credit unions have the wonderfully titled position of 'Money laundering Officer', which I held at one point & involves doing exactly the opposite. Joking aside, an important & interesting job ! On the same principle, we should consider a 'Voting Fraud Officer', as having in depth knowledge & experience of what 'should' happen often gives a feel for when things are not as they ought to be. Tower Hamlets threads passim. I obviously would wish to nominate myself, if only to decorate an already interesting CV.  |
|
|
|
Post by mick745 on May 28, 2014 17:40:56 GMT
Count me in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tangent on May 30, 2014 12:57:58 GMT
This is a really superb idea by James, and I certainly look forward to joining.
Various points do occur to me. The use of 'Psephologists' seems wrong to me: it seems best suited to an organisation with a clear accredited definition of people who are psephologists, and people who are not, and determining membership accordingly - whereas we would only, at least initially, be united by our interest.
General education of the electorate in electoral matters is something I would see as one of the fundamental aims of the association, although not one which should be the primary aim. Information we provide on our own behalf, such as a database of election results or factsheets explaining basic electoral terms and processes, might be quite useful.
We might also elect officers to carry out specific tasks; say, one of our number qualified in statistics to assess our own figures, comment on those put up by others, and to suggest new ways of assessing data, such as an improved measure of swing or the calculation of notional results.
Lastly, we could have a blog with reasonably lengthy articles - which could possibly grow into a journal if we have the material.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on May 30, 2014 13:03:32 GMT
This is a really superb idea by James, and I certainly look forward to joining. Various points do occur to me. The use of 'Psephologists' seems wrong to me: it seems best suited to an organisation with a clear accredited definition of people who are psephologists, and people who are not, and determining membership accordingly - whereas we would only, at least initially, be united by our interest. General education of the electorate in electoral matters is something I would see as one of the fundamental aims of the association, although not one which should be the primary aim. Information we provide on our own behalf, such as a database of election results or factsheets explaining basic electoral terms and processes, might be quite useful. We might also elect officers to carry out specific tasks; say, one of our number qualified in statistics to assess our own figures, comment on those put up by others, and to suggest new ways of assessing data, such as an improved measure of swing or the calculation of notional results. Lastly, we could have a blog with reasonably lengthy articles - which could possibly grow into a journal if we have the material. I smell professionalism, exams, member, associate and master, letters after name and exclusivity? Let's not go there. |
|
|
|
Post by Tangent on May 30, 2014 13:22:00 GMT
This is a really superb idea by James, and I certainly look forward to joining. Various points do occur to me. The use of 'Psephologists' seems wrong to me: it seems best suited to an organisation with a clear accredited definition of people who are psephologists, and people who are not, and determining membership accordingly - whereas we would only, at least initially, be united by our interest. General education of the electorate in electoral matters is something I would see as one of the fundamental aims of the association, although not one which should be the primary aim. Information we provide on our own behalf, such as a database of election results or factsheets explaining basic electoral terms and processes, might be quite useful. We might also elect officers to carry out specific tasks; say, one of our number qualified in statistics to assess our own figures, comment on those put up by others, and to suggest new ways of assessing data, such as an improved measure of swing or the calculation of notional results. Lastly, we could have a blog with reasonably lengthy articles - which could possibly grow into a journal if we have the material. I smell professionalism, exams, member, associate and master, letters after name and exclusivity? Let's not go there. I would agree, carlton: I wouldn't want to go down the full learned society route - and, even if we wanted to, the Political Studies Association have got there first. But we can be reasonably credible without taking ourselves too seriously. |
|
|
|
Post by AdminSTB on Jan 10, 2017 18:47:38 GMT
I've been looking back at the origins of this sub board and am wondering if we might ever get this idea off the ground some day. There was so much initial enthusiasm. Then momentum was completely lost, presumably because there was no clear consensus as to where to start.
|
|
peterl
Green
Congratulations President Trump
Posts: 8,473
|
Post by peterl on Jan 10, 2017 19:16:17 GMT
It would be a very good idea to set up some formal structure, mainly in order to be able to respond as an organisation to consultations on election matters. In that spirit, creating a statement of aims and some sort of representative governance structure would seem to be a good start.
|
|
