Welcome to the Community

Please choose one of the options below to log in and get stuck in!

Login with PPUK

Internal election results July 2015

You can view the results here.


  • Thank you to everyone who voted :) especially those who voted for me :D
  • \o/

    Congrats to all who won and to those who I'll be working with in the coming term.

  • Thanks to the nominations office and all for organising and coordinating this. I'm looking forward to taking this step of becoming more involved. (And thanks also for those who supported me by voting and especially to Maria for seconding my nomination.)

    Anyway, I had a quick question about the OpenSTV software. The results file refers to version 1.6.1 and I gather that the most recent open source version is 1.7. I was therefore just wondering (for the longer term) whether any of the following listed changes might warrant consideration of using an updated version:
    • Added SanFranciscoRCV method
    • Added support for cleaning of ballots as done in San Francisco (before was only Cambridge cleaning)
    • Relaxed minimum requirements for number of candidates and ballots
    Obviously I appreciate that such work wouldn't be a high priority and therefore I wouldn't expect much (or any) discussion around this to really be needed. (And please direct me to previous discussions elsewhere, as I easily may have missed them.)

  • And on the subject of election results, is Previous Elections to be a live page where such current/future results are to be collated?
  • (I posted too soon, in error.)

    How does it work? What needs doing/what can I do?
  • As we use ERS97 STV v1.6.1 is probably good enough for us :)
  • Disappointed to say that I only received an email notifying me of the elections at 21:17 last night, once the elections had been closed for almost 24 hours. I was aware of them because I keep active on the forums etc, but I wonder how many others didn't know about them in time?
  • The answer is probably "quite a lot", unfortunately. We only found out about this issue once the voting had been open for a while, and it took us some time to figure out a solution (the need to respect the preferences of those who had opted out of receiving newsletters, for data protection reasons, precluded a quick fix). When we did solve the problem, for some reason the server was being abysmally slow to send out the emails, to the extent that it took at least 24 hours to send them all out.

    I discussed this with the election monitors and we agreed that there was no procedural problem, since we've been advertizing the elections via other channels (Facebook, Twitter, here) and there is no constitutional requirement to notify members by email. Still, it is definitely not ideal, and a major concern for the future. Hopefully those members who are not signed up to the relevant newsletters will do so now that they've been prompted. In addition, we've tweaked the Ts and Cs such that we can email the whole membership if we need to, regardless of newsletter preferences, though we promise to do this sparingly.
  • It does seem to have been an issue as you seem to have had <6% turnout for your election, a ringing endorsement of your candidates if ever I heard one.
  • You shouldn't really compare yourself to the GMB as that's not really a fair comparison. Most people are members of the GMB for the benefits of being in a union so don't really care about how it's run generally. The running of the Union is a side issue compared to the benefits of the Union for most members.

    For PPUK the only reason to be in PPUK is because you're interested in the party itself, there's no other benefit to being in the party. If you compare yourself to a political party, say the liberal democrats they had a 64.1% turnout for their last leadership election. Getting under 6% is truly pathetic really, I mean you have so many elections it would seem you would be used to getting the vote out. Or is it a truer reflection of you actual membership, about 40-50 people.
  • edited July 2015
    @aramoro Hard to be sure but I'm of the opinion our membership is divided into the following groups (this isn't an exhaustive list):

    Those who like what we stand for but have absolutely no interest in being an active member of a political party

    Those who like the idea of being in this political party but don't have time to be active.

    Those who like the idea of being in this political party but have no idea of how to help - in some cases leading them to distance themselves from disillusionment.

    And some who are active.

    We certainly do not have 40-50 who are regularly active - I wish!! But it may well be fair to suggest that ~50 is the size of our membership that are ready and willing to help if we can sort that out.

    I have no doubt that if we can function in such a way as to actually get involvement from those who are interested that we'll see that willing-to-engage number increase significantly. But until we do we deserve all the criticism we get for the poor turnouts.
  • @Drowz0r you drew comparisons to the GMB so I was picking something on that scale but more applicable to your organisation, that was when the lib dems elected Nick Clegg so not that many of them had left at that stage. Engagement isn't really that hard, setup a mailchimp account and email your members. You have online voting so it should be even easier than casting a vote in a major party's election. You really need to be thinking about why your engagement is so bad and how to make it better. An unengaged membership isn't really a membership at all, it's just some people who forgot to stop a direct debit.

    @azrael I wasn't suggesting you had 40-50 active, just that many casually engaged members. it would be intersting to see how many of your ~750 members have chosen to receive no contact from the party at all. Do you have figures about how many people open your newsletter etc, what your reach is on twitter etc?
  • Our drupal platform manages memberships and newsletter subscriptions (as opposed to a separate mailchimp system). It has pros and cons - when the paypal integration was working properly it made membership really smooth - it is currently needing some maintenance :(. That's by the by as far as your question goes - I don't think there's anything in our newsletters that supports tracking. This is possibly because the plugin we use doesn't support it... or it could be an active choice on our part that we don't want to track (the latter would probably be preferable).

    We can work out how many members turn off all their subscriptions (not sure if this is a quick search or a tedious search) and I know for a fact we do have some members who actively object whenever they get sent something even though they insist they want to continue being a member. I'd put these people into the 'Those who like what we stand for but have absolutely no interest in being an active member of a political party' bracket.

    As for twitter reach I think 'impressions' might be the relevant stat - Twitter is showing our latest impression stat (so last ~30 days) as 75.2K. Previous months were 115K, 209K. This marries up with reduced activity on twitter the past few months on my part :(

    Some other highlights: May 2014 (EU elections) we had 1.2M impressions with 38.2K impressions per day - we did really well with social media for the EU campaign. Comparative stats for the general election this year: 213.2K with 6.9K impressions per day (we really didn't do as well!).
Sign In or Register to comment.