Forums: Archive: 2006-2007 USPA BOD Elections:
USPA Membership

 


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Jan 7, 2007, 10:47 AM
Post #1 of 11 (1891 views)
Shortcut
USPA Membership Can't Post

This does not apply to all, but to lots!

In following the amount of complaining here and other web places, it is truly pathetic how the US Skydiver has NOT stood up and taken control of their skydiving in this country.

The current USPA voting shows that the Membership is into complaining but not acting.

115 votes in a region that had 2 candidates?
Only 1110 votes for the highest National Director?

And now some want to attack and question the Exec. Dir. for what he does and how much he is paid? I submit he is not paid enough since he has to act on our behalf and do what we refuse to do, stand up for our sport.

For the newer skydivers who keep stating that USPA should stay out of the regulation of our sport, stop and look around, this is not the 50's, 60's or 70's. Our government and sue happy society will not allow us to live in that free time again. USPA is the only thing keeping you in the air and in a reasonably safe environment.

It is the actions of the licensed jumpers, who think they know it all, that are harming the sport.

Before you yell that USPA is broke and needs to be fixed, look in the mirror, if you didn't vote, your broke, not USPA.

Matt


koz2000  (D License)

Jan 7, 2007, 2:55 PM
Post #2 of 11 (1839 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] USPA Membership [In reply to] Can't Post

I did vote. I think one thing that USPA could do to increase participation of voting is have online ballots. As many DZ now have internet access, and as many people are computer / internet literate, votes would increase. Hopefully we'll see that on the next election.


3331  (D 3331)

Jan 7, 2007, 6:33 PM
Post #3 of 11 (1806 views)
Shortcut
Re: [koz2000] USPA Membership [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I think one thing that USPA could do to increase participation of voting is have online ballots. Hopefully we'll see that on the next election.

MadUntil 10% of the Members vote yes on a proxy allowing the Board of Directors to bring USPA into the 21 Century nothing will change and we'll continue to be stuck in the 1960's.


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Jan 7, 2007, 6:48 PM
Post #4 of 11 (1801 views)
Shortcut
Re: [koz2000] USPA Membership [In reply to] Can't Post

I think USPA should actually post WHO voted.
Then we may get the 10% next time around.

As posted above we can't do any thing in this organization, until the MEMBERSHIP steps up and does its job!

Matt


Premier PhreeZone  (D License)
Moderator
Jan 8, 2007, 7:40 AM
Post #5 of 11 (1760 views)
Shortcut
Re: [3331] USPA Membership [In reply to] Can't Post

Remember that 10% is also made up of Lifetime members that left the sport years ago and way WAY too many students that had to buy the USPA membership to finish AFF and have not a clue as to what is being talked about in the magazine. We got about 4.5% of the members to vote in this election, getting double that just will not happen unless everyone steps up to make it happen.

The ND's and RD's need to be out visiting DZ's with blank proxies in hand explaining the need to vote. S&TA's need to step up more into the liason role they are to have and push the proxies hard next time they are out there. There shouldn't be a reason in the world that the Proxy ballets were not sitting on every manifest counter in the US the last time they were pushed but very few DZ's actually helped to push the proxies.


MakeItHappen

Jan 8, 2007, 11:17 AM
Post #6 of 11 (1722 views)
Shortcut
Re: [all] USPA Membership [In reply to] Can't Post

You folks are jumping to un-supported conclusions.

#1 - You do not know how many ballots were cast.
I called HQ today and found out that 2573 ballots were cast.
Using 30k-29K as a membership total, that's about 8.6-8.9% turnout, respectively.
It's not the dismal 4% that others have posted.
Certainly, it is less than previous years, but not as bleak as some of you make it out to be.

#2 - Not all votes cast are listed on the USPA web site.
I don't know why they do this, but they only list the people on the ballot and the winners from the regions where there were no candidates.
IOW, there are other votes cast for other people that are not on the USPA web site.

#3 - There were about 100 invalid ballots for various reasons. I do not know the break down of reasons, but they were all the common reasons: no signature, voting for the same person as RD and ND, voting for someone outside your region, expired membership, etc.

#4 - The UNDER-ESTIMATED average number of votes (not ballots) per voter for ND is 4.
You get this number by adding up all the votes counts of all ND candidates and divide by 2573.
It is an under-estimate because not all votes are listed on the USPA web site.
I do not know how this number has changed over the years, as I never calculated it before.
IOW, are fewer people casting all 8 votes than before?

The full report will be available at the next BOD meeting.

.


(This post was edited by MakeItHappen on Jan 8, 2007, 11:21 AM)


Premier NWFlyer  (D License)

Jan 8, 2007, 12:47 PM
Post #7 of 11 (1703 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] USPA Membership [In reply to] Can't Post

Thanks for the clarification of the numbers. I think 8-9% is still pretty sad.

One other thing I can think of that might help out (particularly if USPA wants its group members to encourage voter turnout) would be to move the time of year of the voting. Many DZs are closed for the winter by voting time (Nov-Dec).

I know that I almost forgot to send mine in time because I was busy with the holidays. It's also a time of year where mail delivery can be slower, so there may have been some ballots that didn't meet the deadline just because mail is slower that time of year. The USPA might also consider using postmark date instead of receipt date when considering whether a ballot is late or not.

These are little things, but we gotta start somewhere at bringing the numbers up.


MakeItHappen

Jan 8, 2007, 1:07 PM
Post #8 of 11 (1693 views)
Shortcut
Re: [NWFlyer] USPA Membership [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Thanks for the clarification of the numbers. I think 8-9% is still pretty sad.

One other thing I can think of that might help out (particularly if USPA wants its group members to encourage voter turnout) would be to move the time of year of the voting. Many DZs are closed for the winter by voting time (Nov-Dec).

I know that I almost forgot to send mine in time because I was busy with the holidays. It's also a time of year where mail delivery can be slower, so there may have been some ballots that didn't meet the deadline just because mail is slower that time of year. The USPA might also consider using postmark date instead of receipt date when considering whether a ballot is late or not.

These are little things, but we gotta start somewhere at bringing the numbers up.

The time the election occurs also requires 10% of membership to change. It was part of detailed proxies a year or two before you started jumping.

The postmark used to be acceptable. Then people started using overnight delivery services, that have (had) no post mark. A reasonable solution was to say the delivery had to be by COB on such-n-such date.

see also USPA Voter Turnout

.


MikeTJumps  (D 5957)

Jan 8, 2007, 2:50 PM
Post #9 of 11 (1667 views)
Shortcut
Re: [koz2000] USPA Membership [In reply to] Can't Post

To have an on-line ballot, the By-laws (or the constitution) has to be changed to allow it. That requires a 10% vote of the entire membership! We had at most a 9% vote for this election (as stated in Jan's posting). The last time the membership was offered a chance to change things, they refused to endorse the offered proxy because it wasn't specific enough. That is why I stated my platform very specifically. Now look at the number of votes I got (300 something; last in a field of 13 national candidates). Therefore, one can assume that popularity aside, only 1% of the membership cared enough to endorse that as a position for change. Folks get what they vote (or don't vote) for and you will now watch costs increase again and the instructional core decrease again over the next two years because of the VOTING and NON-VOTING PUBLIC's APATHY!


(This post was edited by MikeTJumps on Jan 8, 2007, 3:03 PM)


EDYDO  (D 1521)

Jan 8, 2007, 4:42 PM
Post #10 of 11 (1647 views)
Shortcut
Re: [NWFlyer] USPA Membership [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

One other thing I can think of that might help out (particularly if USPA wants its group members to encourage voter turnout) would be to move the time of year of the voting. Many DZs are closed for the winter by voting time (Nov-Dec).

This has been on the table for some time and it has merit. We have to look at the unintended consequences of such a change. Unless the petition rules are changed at the same time, that will put new RD candidates gathering signatures in the cold months. It is quite difficult during the warm months.

Ed


MikeTJumps  (D 5957)

Jan 8, 2007, 9:51 PM
Post #11 of 11 (1604 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EDYDO] USPA Membership [In reply to] Can't Post

Gee...that was part of my stated platform, but I only got a bit over 300 votes; therefore the BOD can conclude that only 300 or so people agreed that the election time should be moved. That against the 2100 or so that didn't vote for me as a statement that they don't agree that the election should be moved is "THE SOUND OF SILENT AGREEMENT" that everything is just fine as it is. You and I know it isn't, but alas, only 300 or so agreed with us.

Of course, I realize that it is a popularity contest and that even though my name is on the cover of the leading introductory text for the sport, that did not garner me enough votes to be even remotely considered as a viable candidate.

Now I have to take the position that the voters didn't agree with the platform I presented, therefore they don't want any changes.

Such is life.



Forums : Archive : 2006-2007 USPA BOD Elections

 


Search for (options)