Woohoo yet another cover up and general principle dodge. Nice one! Presedential candidate does what could be viewed as electioneering, despite his very good knowledge of the rules. Council objects, people resign etc. Then in an 'emergency' meeting all eight hours of deliberations are overturned because the elections are in fact deemed 'fair'. Anyone ever heard of the dodgy dossier?
No, Ashley Brown. Have you ever set aside two weeks of your life for a campaign? The entire process has been one of the most arduous experiences of my life. The least any candidate should expect is a fair vote.
I think most candidates would be happy to walk away from a fair vote, even if they have lost; but if that vote could have been unfairly biased in any way - then that candidate has every right to complain and must do so.
Have you whinging bastards ever considered that maybe they changed their minds not after ten minutes of debate ? since the vast majority of those voting were there on thursday ? but after having 72 hours to actually think about the whole thing calmly and rationally?
And yes, a fair election is to be expected. That's why we have this arduous system of appeals etc.: to ensure everyone gets a fair hearing. So, now all this c**p has been cycled through again, candidates should just stop whinging and get on with it.
Perhaps everyone involved should just lighten up a bit and stop treating ICU elections as the most important thing in the universe. Important, yes. Important enough to get in a right old stress about, no.
A large proportion of the candidates seem to be taking themselves far too seriously.
Some people also seem to think that the electorate can be swayed by 3 words in a column in Felix.
Will we ever see ICU elections run on the basis of good manifesto pledges and the charisma of the candidates? Or will it continue to be a who-can-throw-their-toys-furthest exercise?
Note for next year: a victory by getting a candidate disqualified for a minor infringement is no victory at all.