We will be joined by the voting task force to explore where ACB needs to go from here.
For the last few years ACB has had a system where every member in good standing, whether at a convention or not, can cast his or, her or their vote when
ACB is trying to make decisions. We have also maintained the ongoing validity of affiliate voting. It is perhaps true that affiliate voting is fairer than
it has ever been and is more reflective of the actual desires of members. That, like so much else, is up for debate! Where do we go from here? If we have
one man one vote, do we need affiliate voting? How significant is it that people who have never attended an ACB convention have the power to determine
the outcome in any election? What are the new rules of the road for candidates? In the old days there was a feeling that those who attended the conventions
knew the folks who were running and knew what they had done in the past! How much do folks who do not attend conventions know? Does attendance at convention
even matter any more? Do we need to change the rules about who can run? We know some things about last year, the first clearly autonomous hybrid convention.
We know that the results of in-person voting and affiliate voting were remarkably similar. We also know from our history that there has been only one vote
in our history that I have been able to establish where the results of the affiliate vote was different from the results of the individual vote. These
are not the only issues. Join us as our Voter Task Force asks us to think about a series of questions surrounding ACB’S democracy.
Find out more at https://acb-tuesday-topics.pinecast.co