What's Going on at MOFIB?
- Thread starter Ret_Talbot
- Start date
I just wanted to let everyone know that I did send in my acceptance of the nomination. Here's my nominee statement:
That was right at the 500 word limit. Here are the citations:
(a) Luis Magnasco (Luis A M), from thread "Elections?" MOFIB, May 18, 2009, 4:44 p.m., "The current improvement of MOFIB situation,and the founding of a democratic organic stucture is mostly the work of the current BOD and some commited and well intentioned moderators."
(b) Luis Magnasco (Luis A M), from thread "Locked Out. Again?" MOFIB, March 27, 2009, 12:40 p.m. Matt, "suffers from some self destructive sporadic mental condition that was heading our ship at full speed against an iceberg" and "his mental flaw is the basic and main reason why all this is happening." Please note that Luis originally accused Matt of being bipolar but that was later edited out. Thread is currently unavailable for member viewing.
(c) Mark Vera (Enigma), from thread "Elections?" MOFIB, May 22, 2009, 11:04 p.m. "Matt attempted to vote John off the board. Luis refused. Matt publicly said he would not work with John. John and Luise voted Matt off. Those are the facts."
(d) Luis Magnasco (Luis A M), from thread "Elections?" MOFIB, May 18, 2009, 4:44 p.m. "A mod is part of the ruling of MOFIB and should be aligned and collaborative with the Site,it´s mission and authorities.Which you don´t seem to be." "Authorities" here seems to mean "board of directors." This was in response to Thales criticizing BOD policy on a non-public, members-only thread. The message was pretty plain to me: What is best for MOFIB is what is decided is best by the board of directors and serving as a moderator means that you cannot question that in a place where the membership can see it. It's my contention that it is certainly possible to serve the interests of MOFIB while questioning the actions of the current set of directors. In fact, I would further argue that some director actions require a critical response from thoughtful people.
(e) I think at least ten posts have gone missing this week alone, along with all the early posts and entire threads. My "Elections?" thread went missing for a while but has not come back into public view. Also, see Luis Magnasco (Luis A M), from thread "Elections?" MOFIB, June 24, 2209, 11:10 a.m., "Thread closed until election is over."
(f) Christian Hoffman (Clownfish75), as quoted on Reefs.org, http://www.reefs.org/forums/topic128192-200.html, "Hi / Your post was removed as it was answered, it was also forwarded onto the election commitee, If was also answered, in that you didnt qualify with the criteria to be an eligable voter. / The request for why your post was removed has also been removed as there is a suspension of political comment till after the election at least. / This pm also constitutes an answer to your question. / Christian"
(g) Luis Magnasco (Luis A M), from thread "Elections?" MOFIB, June 9, 2009, 3:07 p.m. "I imagined it was a simple posting thing,but the BOD decided that secret votes were better,also for nominations."
(h) Luis Magnasco (Luis A M), from thread "Elections?" MOFIB, June 16, 2009, 12:36 p.m. "A never posting or just lurker member contributes nothing,no matter he/she is a breeding authority."
Thank you for nominating me.In a perfect world you shouldn't have to make this choice about me. I don’t sit on boards unless I'm passionate about the organization. (I have sat on the BOD of a non-profit in my local community for the last ... 14 years(?). I hold that seat at the pleasure of the director and the rest of the board because there are no voting members in that organization.) And, if the organization has captured my imagination then it's usually being run well and my participation in the leadership is not particularly necessary. I'm not someone who really wants the kind of power that goes with political office. So, MOFIB.... MOFIB is a community that I love. Maybe I should say "loved," as it has now become a chore to be here and participate rather than something that I really want to do. But, if there's any chance at all of rejuvenating the spark of the community I feel that my duty is to do everything in my power to try to get it there. That includes accepting a seat on the BOD if the membership chooses to vote me to one.
While I appreciate the time that John and Luis have given, I do not believe that their decisions in the past few months have been for the good of the organization. Ask yourself: Is MOFIB better now than it was a few months ago? (a) Can you say to yourself that you want to be led by someone who lies to you about actions they take on your behalf? (b), (c) Do you want to be led by people who seem to confuse "best for MOFIB" and "loyalty to MOFIB" for "best for me as a director of MOFIB" and "loyalty to me as a director of MOFIB"? (d) Is it really good for the membership to have leaders who exercise such a heavy hand by deleting and censoring members' posts? (e), (f) Do you think the best way to go about the elections was to keep everything as secret as possible? (g) If you do elect me to a seat, I promise that I will do everything in my power to return MOFIB to a community where everyone can feel welcome to participate at whatever level they are comfortable. (h) If you elect me, I can't promise that you'll always like all the decisions that I might make--it's not that kind of a job--but I promise you that I will never try to hide the decisions that I make behind justifications that are false. I will do my best to place the needs of the community ahead of my personal desires and personal loyalties. If you elect me, I promise you that I will not seek to retain my seat without facing the reelection process so that the membership will always have a say about whether I should sit on the board. Thanks for reading this!
Citations available at: http://www.ummfish.com/citations.txt
That was right at the 500 word limit. Here are the citations:
(a) Luis Magnasco (Luis A M), from thread "Elections?" MOFIB, May 18, 2009, 4:44 p.m., "The current improvement of MOFIB situation,and the founding of a democratic organic stucture is mostly the work of the current BOD and some commited and well intentioned moderators."
(b) Luis Magnasco (Luis A M), from thread "Locked Out. Again?" MOFIB, March 27, 2009, 12:40 p.m. Matt, "suffers from some self destructive sporadic mental condition that was heading our ship at full speed against an iceberg" and "his mental flaw is the basic and main reason why all this is happening." Please note that Luis originally accused Matt of being bipolar but that was later edited out. Thread is currently unavailable for member viewing.
(c) Mark Vera (Enigma), from thread "Elections?" MOFIB, May 22, 2009, 11:04 p.m. "Matt attempted to vote John off the board. Luis refused. Matt publicly said he would not work with John. John and Luise voted Matt off. Those are the facts."
(d) Luis Magnasco (Luis A M), from thread "Elections?" MOFIB, May 18, 2009, 4:44 p.m. "A mod is part of the ruling of MOFIB and should be aligned and collaborative with the Site,it´s mission and authorities.Which you don´t seem to be." "Authorities" here seems to mean "board of directors." This was in response to Thales criticizing BOD policy on a non-public, members-only thread. The message was pretty plain to me: What is best for MOFIB is what is decided is best by the board of directors and serving as a moderator means that you cannot question that in a place where the membership can see it. It's my contention that it is certainly possible to serve the interests of MOFIB while questioning the actions of the current set of directors. In fact, I would further argue that some director actions require a critical response from thoughtful people.
(e) I think at least ten posts have gone missing this week alone, along with all the early posts and entire threads. My "Elections?" thread went missing for a while but has not come back into public view. Also, see Luis Magnasco (Luis A M), from thread "Elections?" MOFIB, June 24, 2209, 11:10 a.m., "Thread closed until election is over."
(f) Christian Hoffman (Clownfish75), as quoted on Reefs.org, http://www.reefs.org/forums/topic128192-200.html, "Hi / Your post was removed as it was answered, it was also forwarded onto the election commitee, If was also answered, in that you didnt qualify with the criteria to be an eligable voter. / The request for why your post was removed has also been removed as there is a suspension of political comment till after the election at least. / This pm also constitutes an answer to your question. / Christian"
(g) Luis Magnasco (Luis A M), from thread "Elections?" MOFIB, June 9, 2009, 3:07 p.m. "I imagined it was a simple posting thing,but the BOD decided that secret votes were better,also for nominations."
(h) Luis Magnasco (Luis A M), from thread "Elections?" MOFIB, June 16, 2009, 12:36 p.m. "A never posting or just lurker member contributes nothing,no matter he/she is a breeding authority."
- Location
- Duluth, MN
I'm back from a well-deserved vacation and I see that the BOD is still very much up to it's old tricks (i.e. pulling threads and links and any discussions...looks like our good old "Elections" thread has been moved back out of the public light again).
GDW, I did want to respond to your one comment...at first, I thought you were talking about me. But then when you said "passive aggressive", I assumed you were talking about SPK (who manipulated the BOD through backhanded dealings). But the, I have to acknowledge you said "unique, gifted, inspirational" and I just realized there's no way your talking about SPK. So NOW that I've written those sentences, now I'll accept the labeling of "passive aggressive"...I felt I've fought for your rights rather overtly aggressively Insurgent? I suppose Honduras' president is an insurgent too? If so, then I'll gladly wear that moniker as a badge of honor. Someone has to fight for the rights that you acknowledge have been taken from you. You may not like my style, but frankly, most of what you see has only come about after the tireless criticisms posted here and elsewhere. If more people had spoken up sooner, perhaps things wouldn't have come to this...
1. You can view the official list of candidates and their submitted statements here - http://www.marinebreeder.org/phpbb/view ... 132&t=5332
2. On that list, the following candidates are ones that I do NOT endorse in any capacity. 4. spawner (Andrew Rhyne), 6. Spraklcat (Christine Williams), 7. spk (Stephen Kennedy), 9. acroporas (William Heaton), 10. Clownfish75 (Christian Hofmann). I do not recommend that you vote for these candidates, and would suggest that you rank them at the bottom. In no uncertain terms, I believe the following ranking from bottom up is in order. Last = SPK. Second To Last = Clownfish75. Third to Last = 6 Spracklecat. Fourth to Last = Spawner. Fifth from last = Acroporas. Remember, due to this unusual "condorcet" elections process, it is JUST AS IMPORTANT who you rank at the top as it is who is at the bottom. People in the middle can, in theory, overtake someone who might ordinarily have more counted votes. Thus, in no uncertain terms, what I have done here is rank the bottom in a way that conveys my view of who, among my unacceptable choices, has done the most damage to MOFIB through their actions and choices.
3. On the same list, the following candidates are my top four picks, and the ones I will be voting for. 1. Kmiec123 (Carl Kmiec), 2. "Umm, Fish" (Andrew Berry),3. Thales (Richard Ross), 5. Miles (Miles Lee)
4. On that same list, the following candidates are ones that I also endorse, but hey, I can't vote for all 7! 8. Colby (Colby Podkin), 11. seafarm (Randy Reed), 12. FuEL (Junkai...).
What follows will be MY rankings, top to bottom, with one or two sentences for each choice.
#1. Kmiec123 - Carl Kmiec - Carl, while not the best typist, has been a strong MOFIB advocate and asset. Carl is a FOUNDING member of MOFIB as well as a moderator. NOTE - if the elected BOD desires to remove all three seated BOD members, Carl Kmiec must be among the 4 voted in, as he is the ONLY resident of Illinois (and by state Law, MOFIB is required to have a director who is resident in this state).
#2. Umm, Fish - Andrew Berry - Andy was actually one of the "next in line" of members that the original BOD was considering to bring up to moderator status; he has been an outspoken and tireless critic, one of the few people who didn't just give up.
#3. Thales - Richard Ross - Here is a charasmatic, intelligent individual who I personally have met on multiple occasions, who is well beyond qualified, being perhaps "the" pioneering Cephalapod breeder in the country if not the world. Again, here is a moderator who has been outright abused by a seated BOD member, but has shown such dedication to the founding principals of MOFIB that he has taken a big risk in continuing to fight to restore MOFIB.
#4. Miles - Miles Lee - Here is Miles, a softspoken MOFIB member who has been the most consistent individual financial contributor to MOFIB since we incorporated and started accepting donations. Here is a typical MOFIB member who I believe the seated BOD could care less about. I believe that if the seated BOD has failed him, he has taken the bold step to get more involved, whereas most people would simply wash their hands and walk away.
#5. Colby - Colby Podkin - Colby has always been someone I can count on for a VERY engaging high level debate on some of the nitty and gritty concepts and what not. Colby is a FOUNDING member of MOFIB as well as a moderator. I believe that a founding member such as Colby can serve to remind any BOD he sits on of the true purpose and founding principals which caused MOFIB to be started in the first place...principals that the seated BOD and administrators have more than lost sight of.
#6. seafarm - Randy Reed - I was fully unaware of Randy's nomination and am thrilled to see him on this list. Randy, and Reed Mariculture, have been STRONG supporters of MOFIB since it's inception (again, here is a person I consider a founding member of MOFIB). Randy (and Reed Mariculture) have been tireless advocates for MOFIB as well as providing financial support, the generousity has been matched by almost no other individual or commercial entity. And at the same time, I believe Randy understands the concept that ALL MOFIB members are commercial, and yet has never used MOFIB in a manner that would be overtly commercial, let alone to misuse this platform. In no uncertain terms, I believe Randy on his individual merits would be a stunning BOD member and one I would never question as having a "conflict of interest"...let's remember that 2 of our seated BOD members run commercial aquarium-related companies, and at least 2 or 3 of the advisors have direct commercial ties as well. Ask me what company has provided more generous and in my opinion, SELFLESS support to breeders on the whole, and it is NOT any of those currently tied to positions of power, but Reed Mariculture. I am proud to say that and if nothing else, I hope these contributions are recognized not only their generousity, but the spirit of the gestures. The ONLY reason Randy is not only my list is that he and I have had no personal discussions about the seated BOD and his own vision of what MOFIB needs to be. I may change my vote, but at the moment, this is where I sit.
#7. FuEl - Junkai...- I think it goes to show that when I know Junkai's last name (or do they flip them over there)...well, I think it just shows that I know Junkai better than most. Junkai has made generous contributions to MOFIB in ways not directly seen by most members...Junkai is a classic example of a member who could have very easily been disenfranchised by the BOD because they don't directly see what he has done for MOFIB. Again, much like Randy, the only reason Junkai is not higher up on my list is that I have not directly discussed the past 3.5 months with him and simply dont' know where he stands.
-- I do not endorse or recommend --
#8. Acroporas - Will Heaton - reasons stated earlier in this thread.
#9. Spawner - Andy Rhyne - reasons stated earlier in this thread.
#10. Spracklecat - Christine Williams - reasons stated earlier in this thread.
#11 - Clownfish75 - Christian Hoffman - I don't even know where to begin besides everything I've already posted...
#12 - SPK - Stephen Kennedy - As someone who I invited to work with me as a partner and who disappeared on the project for almost half a year (and would have probably left even longer were it not for him learning we were moving on without him), I could not fathom the lengths that Stephen Kennedy would go to in an attempt to "retake by force" something he truly invested so little in and showed such utter disregard to, as well as the full disrespect he has shown me and all the other members. The very notion that a personal promise made to him by John Lauth is the reason has caused this entire organizational breakdown should be proof enough as to how truly manipulative and self-motivated Mr. Kennedy is when it comes to MOFIB. Here is someone who abuses what power he currently has, and who has confessed to his actions only to then remove his confessions from the public eye. Here is someone who has accused me of everything that he has actually done to our members, in fact, here is someone who has accused me of destroying MOFIB, when in fact is is his actions that caused it's demise. It is rare for me to say that MOFIB would be better off without someone, but in this particular case, having over 2 years of history to reflect on, SPK should spend more of his time actually trying to breed something rather than trying to rule a community he contributes woefully little towards. I have given Mr. Kennedy many more than his fair share of chances, I have attempted at every turn to put the past behind us, and every time that has proven to be a misstep.
---
And with that, is my ticket. By all means, feel free to make your own choices. For the record, I do not know that all 4 candidates I have selected WILL all vote together to remove any seated BOD members. I have not asked them to make that pledge to me or you either. By all means, if you feel as I do that such action would be required to change the course of MOFIB, by all means do feel free to seek out those individuals who see that simpy being elected and expanding the BOD membership may not be enough.
FWIW,
Matt
GDW, I did want to respond to your one comment...at first, I thought you were talking about me. But then when you said "passive aggressive", I assumed you were talking about SPK (who manipulated the BOD through backhanded dealings). But the, I have to acknowledge you said "unique, gifted, inspirational" and I just realized there's no way your talking about SPK. So NOW that I've written those sentences, now I'll accept the labeling of "passive aggressive"...I felt I've fought for your rights rather overtly aggressively
Insurgent? I suppose Honduras' president is an insurgent too? If so, then I'll gladly wear that moniker as a badge of honor. Someone has to fight for the rights that you acknowledge have been taken from you. You may not like my style, but frankly, most of what you see has only come about after the tireless criticisms posted here and elsewhere. If more people had spoken up sooner, perhaps things wouldn't have come to this...1. You can view the official list of candidates and their submitted statements here - http://www.marinebreeder.org/phpbb/view ... 132&t=5332
2. On that list, the following candidates are ones that I do NOT endorse in any capacity. 4. spawner (Andrew Rhyne), 6. Spraklcat (Christine Williams), 7. spk (Stephen Kennedy), 9. acroporas (William Heaton), 10. Clownfish75 (Christian Hofmann). I do not recommend that you vote for these candidates, and would suggest that you rank them at the bottom. In no uncertain terms, I believe the following ranking from bottom up is in order. Last = SPK. Second To Last = Clownfish75. Third to Last = 6 Spracklecat. Fourth to Last = Spawner. Fifth from last = Acroporas. Remember, due to this unusual "condorcet" elections process, it is JUST AS IMPORTANT who you rank at the top as it is who is at the bottom. People in the middle can, in theory, overtake someone who might ordinarily have more counted votes. Thus, in no uncertain terms, what I have done here is rank the bottom in a way that conveys my view of who, among my unacceptable choices, has done the most damage to MOFIB through their actions and choices.
3. On the same list, the following candidates are my top four picks, and the ones I will be voting for. 1. Kmiec123 (Carl Kmiec), 2. "Umm, Fish" (Andrew Berry),3. Thales (Richard Ross), 5. Miles (Miles Lee)
4. On that same list, the following candidates are ones that I also endorse, but hey, I can't vote for all 7! 8. Colby (Colby Podkin), 11. seafarm (Randy Reed), 12. FuEL (Junkai...).
What follows will be MY rankings, top to bottom, with one or two sentences for each choice.
#1. Kmiec123 - Carl Kmiec - Carl, while not the best typist
, has been a strong MOFIB advocate and asset. Carl is a FOUNDING member of MOFIB as well as a moderator. NOTE - if the elected BOD desires to remove all three seated BOD members, Carl Kmiec must be among the 4 voted in, as he is the ONLY resident of Illinois (and by state Law, MOFIB is required to have a director who is resident in this state).#2. Umm, Fish - Andrew Berry - Andy was actually one of the "next in line" of members that the original BOD was considering to bring up to moderator status; he has been an outspoken and tireless critic, one of the few people who didn't just give up.
#3. Thales - Richard Ross - Here is a charasmatic, intelligent individual who I personally have met on multiple occasions, who is well beyond qualified, being perhaps "the" pioneering Cephalapod breeder in the country if not the world. Again, here is a moderator who has been outright abused by a seated BOD member, but has shown such dedication to the founding principals of MOFIB that he has taken a big risk in continuing to fight to restore MOFIB.
#4. Miles - Miles Lee - Here is Miles, a softspoken MOFIB member who has been the most consistent individual financial contributor to MOFIB since we incorporated and started accepting donations. Here is a typical MOFIB member who I believe the seated BOD could care less about. I believe that if the seated BOD has failed him, he has taken the bold step to get more involved, whereas most people would simply wash their hands and walk away.
#5. Colby - Colby Podkin - Colby has always been someone I can count on for a VERY engaging high level debate on some of the nitty and gritty concepts and what not. Colby is a FOUNDING member of MOFIB as well as a moderator. I believe that a founding member such as Colby can serve to remind any BOD he sits on of the true purpose and founding principals which caused MOFIB to be started in the first place...principals that the seated BOD and administrators have more than lost sight of.
#6. seafarm - Randy Reed - I was fully unaware of Randy's nomination and am thrilled to see him on this list. Randy, and Reed Mariculture, have been STRONG supporters of MOFIB since it's inception (again, here is a person I consider a founding member of MOFIB). Randy (and Reed Mariculture) have been tireless advocates for MOFIB as well as providing financial support, the generousity has been matched by almost no other individual or commercial entity. And at the same time, I believe Randy understands the concept that ALL MOFIB members are commercial, and yet has never used MOFIB in a manner that would be overtly commercial, let alone to misuse this platform. In no uncertain terms, I believe Randy on his individual merits would be a stunning BOD member and one I would never question as having a "conflict of interest"...let's remember that 2 of our seated BOD members run commercial aquarium-related companies, and at least 2 or 3 of the advisors have direct commercial ties as well. Ask me what company has provided more generous and in my opinion, SELFLESS support to breeders on the whole, and it is NOT any of those currently tied to positions of power, but Reed Mariculture. I am proud to say that and if nothing else, I hope these contributions are recognized not only their generousity, but the spirit of the gestures. The ONLY reason Randy is not only my list is that he and I have had no personal discussions about the seated BOD and his own vision of what MOFIB needs to be. I may change my vote, but at the moment, this is where I sit.
#7. FuEl - Junkai...- I think it goes to show that when I know Junkai's last name (or do they flip them over there)...well, I think it just shows that I know Junkai better than most. Junkai has made generous contributions to MOFIB in ways not directly seen by most members...Junkai is a classic example of a member who could have very easily been disenfranchised by the BOD because they don't directly see what he has done for MOFIB. Again, much like Randy, the only reason Junkai is not higher up on my list is that I have not directly discussed the past 3.5 months with him and simply dont' know where he stands.
-- I do not endorse or recommend --
#8. Acroporas - Will Heaton - reasons stated earlier in this thread.
#9. Spawner - Andy Rhyne - reasons stated earlier in this thread.
#10. Spracklecat - Christine Williams - reasons stated earlier in this thread.
#11 - Clownfish75 - Christian Hoffman - I don't even know where to begin besides everything I've already posted...
#12 - SPK - Stephen Kennedy - As someone who I invited to work with me as a partner and who disappeared on the project for almost half a year (and would have probably left even longer were it not for him learning we were moving on without him), I could not fathom the lengths that Stephen Kennedy would go to in an attempt to "retake by force" something he truly invested so little in and showed such utter disregard to, as well as the full disrespect he has shown me and all the other members. The very notion that a personal promise made to him by John Lauth is the reason has caused this entire organizational breakdown should be proof enough as to how truly manipulative and self-motivated Mr. Kennedy is when it comes to MOFIB. Here is someone who abuses what power he currently has, and who has confessed to his actions only to then remove his confessions from the public eye. Here is someone who has accused me of everything that he has actually done to our members, in fact, here is someone who has accused me of destroying MOFIB, when in fact is is his actions that caused it's demise. It is rare for me to say that MOFIB would be better off without someone, but in this particular case, having over 2 years of history to reflect on, SPK should spend more of his time actually trying to breed something rather than trying to rule a community he contributes woefully little towards. I have given Mr. Kennedy many more than his fair share of chances, I have attempted at every turn to put the past behind us, and every time that has proven to be a misstep.
---
And with that, is my ticket. By all means, feel free to make your own choices. For the record, I do not know that all 4 candidates I have selected WILL all vote together to remove any seated BOD members. I have not asked them to make that pledge to me or you either. By all means, if you feel as I do that such action would be required to change the course of MOFIB, by all means do feel free to seek out those individuals who see that simpy being elected and expanding the BOD membership may not be enough.
FWIW,
Matt
- Location
- Duluth, MN
Rook, can you explain why we've apparently switched election software yet again???
My understanding based on a myriad of info stemming from BOD Minutes was that CVIS was BOD approved - http://www.cs.cornell.edu/andru/civs.html
Can you please elaborate on why all MOFIB members are now being directed to vote @ http://www.ballotbin.com, which apparently is something from Georgetown University?
(I have emailed this question to Rook as well, but would prefer a public answer)
Thanks,
Matt
My understanding based on a myriad of info stemming from BOD Minutes was that CVIS was BOD approved - http://www.cs.cornell.edu/andru/civs.html
Can you please elaborate on why all MOFIB members are now being directed to vote @ http://www.ballotbin.com, which apparently is something from Georgetown University?
(I have emailed this question to Rook as well, but would prefer a public answer)
Thanks,
Matt
mwp":2ypgh3g8 said:
I made the determination to switch to ballotbin. I had some reservations regarding the "ranking" vote that the other software used and the potential to have a person win the election without a plurality of the vote. Ballotbin is a straight pluarality vote system: ie. the most votes wins. This was a last minute change but I believe it to be a change for the better. It also provide me with total control over the voting process.
- Location
- Duluth, MN
Rook":tsz6c4nq said:
AWESOME ON ALL COUNTS then ROOK!
- Location
- Duluth, MN
So much for the BOD's 100% suspension of political discussions on MOFIB. Hooray for Jeremy getting something like this allowed, but what a crock from the existing BOD.
- Location
- Duluth, MN
Guess who logged on this morning and CANNOT VOTE!
I emailed Rook about this, including the three distinct notifications I received about this vote. The message on the site I received is:
I emailed Rook about this, including the three distinct notifications I received about this vote. The message on the site I received is:
- Location
- Duluth, MN
FOUND TWO NOTICES from ROOK @ MOFIB regarding these TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES:
http://www.marinebreeder.org/phpbb/view ... 264&t=5339 - Mulitple Notices
http://www.marinebreeder.org/phpbb/view ... 264&t=5342 - Voting Software ERRORS
http://www.marinebreeder.org/phpbb/view ... 253&t=5341 - Jake's post about his inability to vote, which I "ditto'd"
Looks like this election will have to be extended yet again.
http://www.marinebreeder.org/phpbb/view ... 264&t=5339 - Mulitple Notices
http://www.marinebreeder.org/phpbb/view ... 264&t=5342 - Voting Software ERRORS
http://www.marinebreeder.org/phpbb/view ... 253&t=5341 - Jake's post about his inability to vote, which I "ditto'd"
Looks like this election will have to be extended yet again.
- Location
- Duluth, MN
VOTERS - BIPARTISAN! - IMPORTANT TO NOTE, you may need to REVOTE! - if you had voted PRIOR TO NOW, you will need to REVOTE, as a candidate was being voted for but the votes weren't being tallied.
You will need to VOTE AGAIN to be sure that your votes are counted, as the ONLY WAY for Rook to fix the above error was to RESTART the election.
This has been explained on MOFIB here:
I cannot stress enough how important it is that you do not give up on this process, and that you are sure to vote in the PROPER election ballot given the technical difficulties.
FWIW,
Matt
You will need to VOTE AGAIN to be sure that your votes are counted, as the ONLY WAY for Rook to fix the above error was to RESTART the election.
This has been explained on MOFIB here:
I cannot stress enough how important it is that you do not give up on this process, and that you are sure to vote in the PROPER election ballot given the technical difficulties.
FWIW,
Matt
I have a list of the 38 individual that previously voted, and I can see those that have and are voting in the new poll (I cannot see how you vote though.) Thus, I will keep close watch to ensure all those that voted originally vote again in the new corrected poll.
- Location
- Duluth, MN
Rook":ejh7u5dz said:
AWESOME Rook. Thanks again, you're doing a fantastic job for MOFIB!
- Location
- Waterford, MI
I just placed my vote. Then I went to switch male Banggais in the breeding room... both turned out to be really easy to do! :wink: Good job Rook!
Sponsor Reefs
We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.
Click here to sponsor $10:
