Blank Votes?
This post is a reply to Alex Ang's recent letter (on our Letters page) and also to state our stand on the issue.
The blank vote campaign was initiated by me (hoho). It was a personal idea before RC was formed.
For any blank vote campaign, the key purpose is to register a protest, and not so much to affect the outcome. Statistically, if a high number of votes are considered void, it speaks of people's discontent at the system or body, or of the quality nominees in general running for elections.
Let's look at a hypothetical scenario: a democratic election of 1 constituency with person A and B contesting. If 80% of the people cast blank votes, their votes will be considered null and void. And whoever wins will be dependent on who gains the majority of the remaining 20% votes. However, does it still mean that the person who is elected is truly supported by the majority of residents in that constituency?
By casting blank votes we are collectively sending out a message that we are unhappy with the current ineffective system, and would like changes to be made to it.
"Thus, if say there is a need for 7 new sec1 prefects, and the 7th candidate has 1000 votes, than he will get in. However, if he only has 500 votes, he will still get in, because the fact is that he is the 7th prefect with the highest support from the school population."
Let's say the 6th candidate receives 500 votes, the 7th receives 10 votes, the rest after the 7th receive 9 votes each. Going by your mentioned system the 7th will still go in. This is insensible. You are basing this idea on the need to make up numbers.
A blank vote is a protest, that you practically do not support any of the candidates. A high number of blank vote is similar to a group protest as opposed to 1 person protesting on the streets. This is the message it intends to put across. However, as we saw more nominees, it seemed that some are indeed worthy of our votes despite the inherent lack of quality in many others, and hence the blank vote campaign will no longer be carried out.
Once again we reiterate that the campaign was something done at an individual level prior to the initiation of RC. It has nothing to do with RC, and it has now been scrapped when we saw worthy candidates.
We know however that quite a significant number of people are advocating amongst themselves to cast blank votes. RC is against casting of blank votes in this elections. We urge everyone to vote, with your precious votes, for a select bunch of nominees who are of high quality to register a strong support for those who are deserving.
posted by hoho @ 10:05 PM
18 Comments:
hi just want to clarify what alex said.
"Thus, if say there is a need for 7 new sec1 prefects, and the 7th candidate has 1000 votes, than he will get in. However, if he only has 500 votes, he will still get in, because the fact is that he is the 7th prefect with the highest support from the school population."
this is not true,i think he might be confused on the way its run. we dont have a fixed number of prefects we need. we have a range, say.. we need 7-10 prefects. when pm (prefect master) does the cut off, he looks for a suitable cutoff to be fair. (im not sure EXACTLY what is suitable, whether its a chi square graph or whatever).
however, if theres a large number of blank votes, the fact still remains that "bad" prefects get voted in. because with less votes, the "difference" in votes would be less and the cut off, more difficult to find. thus i urge you, VOTE for the capable ones, and DONT vote for anyone else. ou dont have to vote the max number you are allowed to. this way, there will be a very clear cut off as to who is well liked, and who is not.
the only point of casting a blank vote is to call for ripb to rethink its election system, and its not the right way to do it, cause it firstly causes difficulty in selecting capable prefects, and the fact is that ripb is constantly rethinking how to do it already (and ho ho and gordie is coming up with some ideas as to how to improve it right?).
yup, vote wisely
i wud just like to say that the ripb has to rethink its elections system. i personally feel that there were many ppl hu were capable and many ppl whom i wud votefor at the interview stage however they were all eliminated. i think thay of the candidates lack a certain zeal and confidence to lead and that is why i think the ripb must look over its selection criteria especially at the interview stage. aside from that i wud like to urge all to vote for the ppl hu are deserving. sending a clear message to the school that certain ppl are acceptable and certain arent. the only downside to this is that ppl hu arent deserving will still get in to make up numbers. i have addressed this issue in a previous post. neverthless, we shud still vote so that we can ensure that the ppl hu are deserving will get in.
hi mac-cadaver.
firstly, with regards to your comment that "only downside to this is that ppl hu arent deserving will still get in to make up numbers." i think this might not be true. as i said, the cut off is chosen as much as possible to be a distinct cut off. (meaning the next highest voted guy is pretty far off). furthermore, there isnt a clear cut WHO are capable and who arent. its a continuous variation (if you study bio :P)
with regards to interview stage criteria, lets be frank, none of us truly knows all the nominees well enough to truly say who is deserving and who is not. we try our best to find out during the interviews and look at the teacher's comments. unfortunately, students comments are not taken (except prefects and ccals), as it is not practical to do so (i also believe many students would reccomend prefects who are not disciplinarian in nature, for e.g)
yup, i personally feel that while some of the nominees might not appear capable, its possibly because they cant campaign well (their own loss). i believe that the nominees must have certain "standard" to get to this stage, as the teachers comments are faily substantiated.
but the fact that even members of the RIPB have conflicting ideas on how the elections work shows that there is an obvious lack of transparency of the voting system and in the school, and even within the RIPB itself.
i suggest that the RIPB make their election system more transparent. that way, members of the school can thoroughly analyse or critise the system of voting in the RIPB elections. what we want in the school is mutual benefits to both parties (RIPB and the other members of the school). surely we do not want losers like KRISTIAN LEE of 1C (i think) inside the RIPB? he really doesnt deserve a place in the RIPB due to his lack of respect to peer and seniors and his disregard for rules (eating in class).
anon -> What zhenghong said is correct, Alex didn't phrase his statement correctly.
Eh. Yea. I don't actually see the point in withholding voting results with the exception of not shaming those with 0 votes.
a blank vote isn't a protest -- it really just seems more like an apathetic, cynical take on the whole situation. it's like saying "i can't change the system, i might as well not be part of it". well gordon, for you and ho sheng who are leaving the school now it seems fine to be apathetic, but the rest of the school can't afford to be.
yes, i agree theres a need to be transparent.
however, ripb is not being "opaque" on purpose. we simply do not tell the students the exact system, because we assume that trust is given to us to treat the system fairly. after all, if we were going to play arnd with the results, we might as well not have an elections. we WANT to have the students feedback in the form of votes.
wow this is so social studies-ish. well, good luck for exams, or cts, whatever you call them. ((:
Hi,
No one is confused lar. The fact is that there is a targeted quota to meet for number of candidates which get in due to the need for manpower.
In deciding the cut off point and number of prefects who get in, 2 factors are considered:
1)the votes of each candidate
2)the targeted quota
So as far as possible we try to meet the quota. It doesn't mean that just because the quota is 7-10 prefects, it has to be strictly adhered to. Take 2 case scenarios:
1) if the 6th person has 1000 votes, the 7-10 have only 200 votes, it doesn't mean that 7 prefects will get in, but rather, 6.
2) Likewise, if the 10th has 1000 votes and the 11th 999, and the 12th 200, doesn't mean that only 10 prefects will get in. but rather, 11.
So in addition to the targeted number of prefects which will get in, there is another factor to cocnsider, which is the votes of the candidates.
Simple?
Alex
can we get someone like david chan to clarify everything?
Well um zhenghong
Since the whole opaque-ity is based on the fact that the student body trusts you,
It's obvious that there are certain elements (look around you, around here) that don't. As long as there are possible dissenters I think it can't work. Therefore I propose that the numbers are disclosed.
EXACTLY cheng, and this is where us being not democratic comes in.
the fact is, we are not a democracy, and we can CHOOSE whether we want to reveal these numbers or not. we do not have to please the student populations or anything close to that.
the elections and all our hard work in communication, stuff like that, we dont do them cause we want to be a democracy, we do them cause we think they aid us in "bringing out the best in every rafflesian" by providing leadership, upholding discipline and stuff, representing the student body.
but anyway, i agree, maybe since transparency is what students one, being more transparent might aid is in attaining our objectives better. i agree that elections proceedings and stuf should be revealed, but NOT the exact number who voted for each prefect. i mean, comeon, they got in, just let them... they humans and our friends. dont put them under all that "you were the last one in, you can never get into exco", or whatever kind of trauma.
however, a practical method must be thought off on telling the students on the exact workings of the elections. people will have questions, etc..
just wondering. why all the "blank-vote as a protest" thing? what's the point of protesting when nothing else gets done? it's like making a lot of noise but not doing anything to correct it. it's like saying "gordon you suck" and then not telling you anything that you might do to un-suck yourself.
Why is everyone talking about blank votes when noone advocates it anymore?
In an election, blank votes are a protest when all candidates suck. And to you, it does not matter which of them get in, cos they all suck. So instead of voting someone, or anyone, that you think ought not to get in, you simply do not vote for anyone. Because in all elections, you do not choose the candidates, you only choose amongst the candidates.
Hope that explains the concept of blank voting.
But again, I reiterate that we are not advocating a blank vote, and urge everyone not to cast a blank vote for this elections.
I guess it started off due to some misunderstanding.
But, I still believe in blank voting as a viable choice in elections, and will defend it, especially when people think its "stupid".
my views on blank votes... they hav not changed since the last elections.
here [links to the blog entry]
Replying to zhenghong's statement about the cut off. We must not forget the fact that the nominees might have gotten votes through popularity rather than capability so even the cut off system will not be effective in cutting off those not good enough to make it to the RIPB.
And also the fact that their own batch mates cast a higher vote, the factor of popularity goes even higher due to peers voting him as well and having a 1.5 strength in that one vote. Rather, the sec 4's who have more experience and we can see how this nominee is able to carry himself better than those of his batch mates who are blinding by probably friendship or the nominee's popularity. You might want to consider letting sec 4's have a higher weightage in votes. Look at my nick u should know who i am
Post a Comment
<< Home