Ballot Results

[aricooperdavis]

And, to jump back a few messages, I've had the OK to release some further analysis of the vote results. First, more details of how the votes for Motions 2A/B/C were related:

This illustrates that, of those who didn't abstein for all 3 of these motions, 82% voted for some change to this section of the constitution, whilst only 16% voted against any change.

Motion 2C only fell short of the 70% support threshold by 8 votes, whilst there are a potential 82 "split" votes for motions 2A and 2B that may have preferred 2C to no change at all but didn't support it because it wasn't their preference of the three motions.

Secondly, the distribution of when votes were cast, which should help inform the choice of ballot duration:

 

[Jenny P]

That is excellent detailed information and is sure to be really useful - thanks very much Ari !

 

[andrewmcleod]

P&I will become a Group, still operating with a Chair and a fixed role set by BCA Council, but without a vote on council.

Strictly speaking I think the motion was just to remove the vote of the P&I Officer which was a quirk inherited from making it the only non-executive Officer position (that wasn't the chair of a standing committee), which leaves it entirely in the hands of Council to appoint a P&I Officer with or without a group (since Council can appoint whoever or whatever it wants to assist it and the work of the BCA; it just can't give people a vote on the Council except as defined by the constitution or an AGM).

 

[PeteHall]

And, to jump back a few messages, I've had the OK to release some further analysis of the vote results. First, more details of how the votes for Motions 2A/B/C were related:

This illustrates that, of those who didn't abstein for all 3 of these motions, 82% voted for some change to this section of the constitution, whilst only 16% voted against any change.

Motion 2C only fell short of the 70% support threshold by 8 votes, whilst there are a potential 82 "split" votes for motions 2A and 2B that may have preferred 2C to no change at all but didn't support it because it wasn't their preference of the three motions.

This is really insightful Ari, thanks for sharing. I'll be honest, I expected more overlap and I expected more votes against all three. Still, the biggest individual group (other than abstentions) was as I expected, favouring all three.

Could you produce a similar diagram showing votes against the three motions (and even abstentions if you can be bothered) ? But would this actually tell us anything?  :-\

Secondly, the distribution of when votes were cast, which should help inform the choice of ballot duration:

This is less surprising, but also informative.

 

[nearlywhite]

I am sorry to see Rostam resign (assuming Rostam is going through with his statement from the interviews) as Rostam I think was a good P&I officer.

I can't stay on council as I fundamentally disagree with Russell's approach, the executive have too much power, take liberties and council does little to keep them in check. I ran for chair as I felt like I had no other choice. I want to keep volunteering but there's no space for me on council as I'd be afraid I'd gum things up and mine and Russell's working relationship is... Antagonistic at best, and I acknowledge I'm not blameless in that.

I believe the BCA will go back to doing nothing but being insurance and funding for regions. That's ok, it's what people voted for - that's what 'stability' realistically means.

I can't find a replacement P&I officer but this isn't a surprise as there'll only be three under 45s left once myself, Ari and Will have gone. There is a real divide between the younger and older cavers and the technology gap is a serious impediment to modernisation. Pretending there isn't a divide and claiming unity with 53% of the vote won't help achieve the agenda promised.

I'm obviously gutted to miss out on having the opportunity to start some real change but realistically it would have taken 6 years to get the right people in the right roles to start updating stuff. I hope I'm wrong and I'll do my best to help in the background.

 

[BradW]

I ran for chair as I felt like I had no other choice.

If this was the main reason you ran, then perhaps it's why you lost. Running because you feel you have something good to offer might have been a better reason, and won you more votes.

I can't find a replacement P&I officer but this isn't a surprise as there'll only be three under 45s left once myself, Ari and Will have gone. There is a real divide between the younger and older cavers and the technology gap is a serious impediment to modernisation.

Dismissing the capabilities of older people also doesn't win many votes. Sorry, Rostam, but this statement in itself is non-inclusive and divisive.

 

[JoshW]

I can't find a replacement P&I officer but this isn't a surprise as there'll only be three under 45s left once myself, Ari and Will have gone. There is a real divide between the younger and older cavers and the technology gap is a serious impediment to modernisation.

Dismissing the capabilities of older people also doesn't win many votes. Sorry, Rostam, but this statement in itself is non-inclusive and divisive.

I don't think he's really dismissed the capabilities of older people, but I can see how it would be read like that.

As a member of council, I can see why young people might be put off joining the old boys club that goes on for hours of inefficiencies. I'm certainly not looking forwards to council meetings restarting, but see it as a necessary evil to keep up the good work the volunteers in Y&D are doing.

The technology gap is a serious impediment to modernisation. For example, prior to Allan stepping up as acting secretary, a vote took place where council overwhelmingly (unanimously if I remember correctly) voted in favour of showing on the minutes of meetings which members of council voted in favour/against/abstain on each motion. When Allan stepped up this was deemed too much hard work, when there was a technological solution at hand (a simple voting button on zoom which will record exactly who votes for what), but this was deemed too difficult for some members of council (by members of the exec I will add). Because of this, the vote made by council has been ignored and the step towards transparency has been cancelled.

 

[2xw]

I wouldn't take BradW seriously, Josh. It's a troll account, that's why they use a VPN and won't put a name to their words (even though it's pretty obvious who they are and how much damage they've done to British caving). I would ignore their obvious goading.

 

[BradW]

I wouldn't take BradW seriously, Josh. It's a troll account, that's why they use a VPN and won't put a name to their words (even though it's pretty obvious who they are and how much damage they've done to British caving). I would ignore their obvious goading.

Could you tell us why you have resigned, Will - it might help give an insight into what you think is wrong with the way things have turned out.

 

[2xw]

I wouldn't take BradW seriously, Josh. It's a troll account, that's why they use a VPN and won't put a name to their words (even though it's pretty obvious who they are and how much damage they've done to British caving). I would ignore their obvious goading.

Could you tell us why you have resigned, Will - it might help give an insight into what you think is wrong with the way things have turned out.

Sure, now that I've finished my doctorate I need to start my career and this unfortunately won't leave any time left for volunteering. If I have any spare time, it'll be used for actual caving!

I've been very vocal in the past about what I feel are issues in the BCA - so I'll be avoiding undermining the new administration by refusing to be goaded by you into that particular bunfight, thanks

 

[badger]

Will cant remember exactly where I saw your resignation but you did make it clear that you was resigning due to work commitments,  and I know how hard I have found getting to zoom meetings this past year with my workload, which will hopefully get easier soon. unfortunately volunteering doesn't pay the bills

 

[2xw]

Aye, it was okay when I was a student, but I'm nearly 30 now and still don't have a pension, which I'm worried about, and it's beyond time me and my partner lived together so Id really like to get a house. I can still be about for odd jobs - I'm still just as keen on helping the student caving community!

An edit: Just realise this hijacks the thread a bit, mods feel free to delete

 

[BradW]

I wouldn't take BradW seriously, Josh. It's a troll account, that's why they use a VPN and won't put a name to their words (even though it's pretty obvious who they are and how much damage they've done to British caving). I would ignore their obvious goading.

Could you tell us why you have resigned, Will - it might help give an insight into what you think is wrong with the way things have turned out.

Sure, now that I've finished my doctorate I need to start my career and this unfortunately won't leave any time left for volunteering. If I have any spare time, it'll be used for actual caving!

I've been very vocal in the past about what I feel are issues in the BCA - so I'll be avoiding undermining the new administration

I have cut back the quote to a perfectly good explanation - hope it goes well for you!

 

[NewStuff]

it's pretty obvious who they are and how much damage they've done to British caving

Same tricks as usual, and no spine to back it up.

On Topic... Nothing changes. Sorry to see it go this way. I think this is a good indication that despite stellar efforts by a few, it really does need dismantling and starting afresh as it's clearly not fir for purpose. Or just abandoning altogether. I suspect there will be a mini exodus at renewal time, talking informally to a few people indicates there are misgivings with being associated with such a body that, quite frankly, doesn't give much of a f*** about dragging itself into modern times.

 

[Shapatti]

with 53% of the vote

I don't think I've heard it mentioned here, but if 619 ballots were returned, does that mean that only about 1/10th of BCA's membership actually engaged with the ballot for what ever reasons.
(Assuming BCA is still sitting around the 6k mark on members... I don't know if there is somewhere this info is publicly available?)
Taking those rough figures does that actually give the incoming Chair about 1/20th support of the membership of BCA?

I really struggle to see why in this day and age, why the vote engagement of BCA is actually that low, especially when the average turnout for General Elections is 67.3%.
(I know there is more incentive to vote for national government than the BCA but still...)

 

[JoshW]

with 53% of the vote

I don't think I've heard it mentioned here, but if 619 ballots were returned, does that mean that only about 1/10th of BCA's membership actually engaged with the ballot for what ever reasons.

And to be honest, this should have been one of the most interesting AGM ballots to return with the first ever properly contested role, and for the chairman role no less.

 

[mikem]

Most are members because they have to be, not because they want to be.

 

[fishes 1]

I really struggle to see why in this day and age, why the vote engagement of BCA is actually that low, especially when the average turnout for General Elections is 67.3%.
(I know there is more incentive to vote for national government than the BCA but still...)

I think the answer to that is quite simple. Most BCA members just want to go caving and think that caving politics is an unnecessary distraction. All the arguments and mud slinging just reinforce this view.

 

[mikem]

& the youth of today don't often seem to appreciate that the old guard were once the radicals & that there is a reason they hold the views they have (but then it was ever thus)

 

[aricooperdavis]

[warning]Back on topic of the Ballot Results now please all![/warning]