View Poll Results: Should the AMA use an outside firm to count Ballots
YES , the AMA should use an outside firm to count Ballots .
18
62.07%
NO , the AMA should NOT use an outside firm to count Ballots .
11
37.93%
Voters: 29. You may not vote on this poll
Poll , should the AMA use an outside firm to count Ballots ?
09-20-2016, 07:13 AM
#1
Poll , should the AMA use an outside firm to count Ballots ?
Hi Gents ,
In a different thread , the subject of the in house counting of the election's ballots has been brought up .
My own belief is that to preserve the integrity of the election , an independent outside firm should do the counting , as it had been done in years past .
Two simple choices are available ;
YES = the AMA should use an outside firm .
NO = the AMA should NOT use an outside firm .
In a different thread , the subject of the in house counting of the election's ballots has been brought up .
My own belief is that to preserve the integrity of the election , an independent outside firm should do the counting , as it had been done in years past .
Two simple choices are available ;
YES = the AMA should use an outside firm .
NO = the AMA should NOT use an outside firm .
09-20-2016, 09:16 AM
#2
Hi Franklin , 
I also believe the ballots should be counted by an independent outside firm , and my reasoning is this ;I was told here some months ago by at least two different posters that the only thing keeping the AMA from receiving a literal deluge of fraudulent model aircraft theft insurance claims is the fact that a police report and signs of forced entry are required to be submitted with the insurance claim . Do you remember me having that conversation with a couple or few of our fellow RCU posters ? Well , if we the members are suspect of possibly giving in to the temptation of "easy money" by filing a false claim , what's to say a member directly affected by and involved in a vote won't also possibly give in to the all too Human temptation to skew the results in his own favor ? This is NOT any kinds of accusation , just to head THAT off before I get it thrown back at me , this is more a case of if we the members are suspect of possibly giving in to temptation then aren't ALL members subject to possibly giving in to their Human urges to "take advantage of the system" ? At what point does a member go from being someone who may follow their urges and needing built in "checks & balances" to insure the honesty of , to someone of such rock solid honesty that they are to be taken as being 100% beyond reproach and as honest as ol "Honest Abe" ?
The Scriptures are chock full of stories of Human temptation and NO MAN is above being tempted . Most do not follow those temptations . Some do . If checks & balances are required of us "unwashed masses" , shouldn't the same apply across the board , from us lowly members right on up to the EC ?
The outside counting of Ballots is just the kind of fair check & balance an election like this deserves if it's integrity is to not be called into question .
Hi Tim , Here's what I was getting at , and I hope you understand ;
Yes sir I do , I trust as an organization 100 % completely in the AMA . I wouldn't have been a member for 50 odd years if I didn't ....
Now , people on the other hand , people as individuals , I trust a good 95/98 ish % of . Not 100 % . No way no how . And that's based on years of seeing accumulated stories of people doing a very good job of hiding their bad character , the best example being these kindly friendly neighborhood good guy dudes who turn out to be serial killers or serial predators like that guy Sandusky who went to jail after hurting all those children all the while in the guise of "coach mr. nice guy" . Since neither You nor I or anybody else has a divining rod that will with 100 % certainty identify someone untrustworthy the entire civilized world is made up of checks & balances to attempt to thwart the ill intended . We , as members , have our checks & balances in the form I've already discussed . In times past , the AMA EC themselves saw fit to instill the check and balance of the outside count specifically to keep the integrity of the election at 100 % because they knew the old adage of "it only tales one bad apple ...." .
I am bringing these two posts over from the "serial numbers" thread , because I believe these two posts best sum up my feelings about why an independent count should be conducted .
09-20-2016, 09:28 AM
#3
I truly hope folks realize that my call for an outside count is by no means a direct accusation of anyone , and intended only to preserve the integrity of the election . Yes I do believe a good 95 to 98 % of all folks to be honest , maybe even more , maybe 99% , but with the belief I have that in any given population there could be 1 to 5 % of the folks who might take advantage , an outside count would assure that a weak moment by someone wouldn't falsely skew the results . That's all , no direct accusations or saying that I think there is some patent dishonesty running rampant through the EC , cause I don't think that at all , just the desire to have the purest results possible by removing one variable , that of temptation .....
Last edited by init4fun; 09-20-2016 at 11:59 AM.
09-20-2016, 10:11 AM
#5
Tim , honestly , I was sad with the way I messed up the wording of some of the Polls of the past , so I was determined to get this one right . My intent was never to trick someone into voting in a way they didn't want to , those really were just badly worded by mistake . I do appreciate that folks will feel one way or the other about the in house VS outside count and I hope that folks will understand that in my opinion there really isn't any "wrong" answer to this question . Some will feel comfortable with an inside count and some won't , but there are no "bad guys" here to be pilloried , just folks sharing opinions ....
09-20-2016, 12:01 PM
#7
My Feedback: (13)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 890
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no reason to believe in any conspiracies and don't think we need to spend money on a third party to count the votes. My club doesn't have a third party count the votes of a board member election, and the USA doesn't have Canada preside over the presidential election. on another note, what is the "turnout" in the ama election as a % of the eligible voters? (stats from any recent election would be fine)
09-20-2016, 12:20 PM
#8
I have no reason to believe in any conspiracies and don't think we need to spend money on a third party to count the votes. My club doesn't have a third party count the votes of a board member election, and the USA doesn't have Canada preside over the presidential election. on another note, what is the "turnout" in the ama election as a % of the eligible voters? (stats from any recent election would be fine)
Hi Baron Brian , thank you for sharing your opinion , all opinions are welcome . As to the % of votes cast , I have no hard numbers but any time I looked into that the results were kinda dismal , as to the lack of participation in the elections .
09-21-2016, 02:47 AM
#10
09-21-2016, 04:56 AM
#13
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no reason to believe in any conspiracies and don't think we need to spend money on a third party to count the votes. My club doesn't have a third party count the votes of a board member election, and the USA doesn't have Canada preside over the presidential election. on another note, what is the "turnout" in the ama election as a % of the eligible voters? (stats from any recent election would be fine)
We can't spend money on a election but we spend money on a flying site ( for example) that a MAJORITY of the paying members will never use or even visit. Kinda silly not to keep the process problem free considering all the controversy over decisions made over the last few years.
Mike
Last edited by rcmiket; 09-21-2016 at 05:00 AM.
09-21-2016, 07:22 AM
#14
well,,
several yeas ago, one group of staff/ec folks got caught rigging a DVP election, so, we went to out of house counting. now, what has occurred once can occur again.
that is the real point here.
remember, "those who do not learn from the past, are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past."
several yeas ago, one group of staff/ec folks got caught rigging a DVP election, so, we went to out of house counting. now, what has occurred once can occur again.
that is the real point here.
remember, "those who do not learn from the past, are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past."
Trust , but Verify .......
09-21-2016, 08:35 AM
#15
Hi CESSNA 421 , The ballot was of course yours to do with as you wish . I do not ask this as any kinds of taunt or chiding , I ask because I'm genuinely curious , why would you chose not vote ? Do you not believe in the integrity of the results ? Do you not like the statements of the four candidates or think any of the 4 would be a good fit for the position ? Is it a case of where you don't really care which of the 4 get the position ? You have my word I have no ulterior motive to asking why you chose not to vote , other than just to know what put you off on the voting , and I will not denigrate you at all for choosing the option of not choosing ...
09-22-2016, 05:02 AM
#16
26 responses in two days , I'd call that good participation given the relative lack of traffic in the AMA forum .
Leads one to wonder , how many actually DO participate here ? My guess is around 35 or so "regular" posters .....
Leads one to wonder , how many actually DO participate here ? My guess is around 35 or so "regular" posters .....
09-24-2016, 05:36 PM
#17
4 days and holding steady at 27 responses . Leads one to wonder what the percentage is of those who will cast a ballot vs those who will cast it aside . Who knows , as an outside guess maybe to the non voters any of the 3 on the ballot is just as good as any other of them are and , and it don't matter to them who gets in as long as things stay the same for them and the type of flying they do ?
09-24-2016, 06:57 PM
#18
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
I would hope that this would be the election that sees the most response in the 80 year history of the AMA. I have to think the events of the last 4 years have at least sparked an interest in the 150,000 plus membership, but I suspect it won't. Look how few show up for our National elections! Looking back to 2011 when Brown won, less than 19,000 voted.
It would be nice to see at least 20% of the membership vote this time around, but not sure about that. We'll see soon enough.
It would be nice to see at least 20% of the membership vote this time around, but not sure about that. We'll see soon enough.
09-24-2016, 07:16 PM
#19
Agreed . With the whole polarization of the drone/FAA/AMA interaction of the past few years you'd think lots of folks would be lining up behind who they think is "pro drone" or "anti drone" , but I do suspect as you say that apathy runs deep in elections of just about every sort (AMA and beyond into the "real world") ...
09-25-2016, 04:28 AM
#20
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed . With the whole polarization of the drone/FAA/AMA interaction of the past few years you'd think lots of folks would be lining up behind who they think is "pro drone" or "anti drone" , but I do suspect as you say that apathy runs deep in elections of just about every sort (AMA and beyond into the "real world") ...
09-25-2016, 07:37 AM
#21
Hi Mike , Oh yea , I agree fully that if the "drone VS traditional" thing is as big of an issue for folks as it appears to be across the multiple RC sites , then the turnout should be huge . I really do though place a lot of belief in that when it comes to elections , even ones during times of contentious issues , that apathy still wins out over action for enough people for the numbers to be any kinds of appreciable . Can you imagine if 50 or better % of all ballots were returned ? A showing that strong would certainly show that folks are of the belief that this IS an important issue to them and that every voice counts on both sides to really show up and "Show em how we feel" . My chosen candidate will be one I hope that while advocating for #550 FPV to continue* , will also not try to blur the line between hobby VS commercial drones and focus on the hobby side exclusively . Giving young members scholarships to train for the jobs of the future in commercial drone ops ? Hell yea I'd be all for that . But to actually run programs training commercial drone pilots ? No I think that would have crossed the line into us (the AMA) venturing too far into the commercial side of things . It's these kinds of questions I had hoped to ask all of the candidates had they accepted Ken's invitation but oh well , I'll have it sorted with myself by mid October in time to send the ballot in . I hope
...* which it's widely known I favor the "original" VS "new & improved" version of .
Last edited by init4fun; 09-25-2016 at 07:39 AM.
