Know something you shouldn't? Tell us, using our quick, 100% anonymous tip-off form!
More on-line voting problems for ULU
It would appear as though the recent ICU sabb elections will not be the only ones to suffer from 'technical' problems caused by ULU's on-line voting system.
Never got a password...
?60,000 for that heap of sh** voting system? Surely you mean 60,000 pence?
Why don't they realise after three failures that it jush dun wark? Let's get some of our computing people do develop some decent software or just stick with the paper ballot.
Which part of that software cost ?60,000 to develop?
Was it the user-friendly interface? The counting system? Or the 12-month holiday in the caribbean for a bunch of fraudulent UCL computing graduates who pulled a fast one on ULU?
It's always fun to see what one has unleashed :-)
I think I'm right in saying that the cost of developing the e-voting system was met either by Senate House or by some other external body and not actually by ULU, though I stand to be corrected!
Just a bit of background as to why e-voting was chosen - ULU Council was informed by the then Vice-Chancellor (Graham Zellick) that appointment to major union offices must be by a secret ballot in which all members of ULU can vote (i.e. invoking Part II of the Education Act 1994).
ULU Council felt that holding a paper ballot was not be feasible and so ULU looked into doing it all online.
Before online voting, ULU Council, which is made up of representatives from each of the College Union's in UL (so about 60 people) voted for all of ULU's sabbaticals and union officers.
Indeed, Rob, this dates back to 1999. That makes it over five years ago that I stuck my oar in. Blimey, I am getting old! :-)
As a candidate in the elections, I'd agree with some of the comments posted. I for example got sent 2 passwords for my 1 card whilst other people I know received no passwords for their cards. I think that the Education Act requires all students to be able to vote, the current system does not allow this. Apart from ICU members, there are c.7000 cards in circulation, compared to over 100,000 students. It is clear, therefore, that it is a system that can never allow all students to vote.
I'd recommend that ULU investigates a better way to hold cross campus elections.
Ben Cohen for ULU President
Ben, Hmmm... yeah nice electioneering there - there is a blindingly obvious way of putting it though:
"It jush dun wark."
We've just had elections were the system failed. What are you going to do about evoting? Scrap it? We aren't interested in 'ULU will look into it'. Duh!!
By "ULU investigate..." I mean exactly that. That ULU must investigate the problems and possible solutions- that's my advice if I don't win.
If I do, here are my own personal views:-
1) ULU cards should be scrapped. If they can't be then they should not require photos and be valid for the length of a course
2) Voting may take place by paper or electronically, with the possibility of electronic 'booths' at colleges with touch screen ballot papers
I would plan that an enquiry be set-up into the recent elections, drawing on 2003-4, ICU's elections and the 2004-5 elections. I would like to see some outside experts contributing ideas to the enquiry.
Agreed - a dual paper/electronic voting system will get a better turnout. It'll also give 'the experts' a bit of time to sort out the glitches.
By less unimpressed, I assume that you may be tempted to vote! Hope to hear your points & questions at hustings tonight at ICU.
Ben Cohen for ULU President
It would be interesting to know how compatible each College ID card is with using a unique ten digit for every student in UL and seeing how this could translate in to an e-voting system.
Paper balloting in future should not be ruled out (I shall do a back-of-the-envelope costing and see what turns up there).
Assuming one ballot box per site (so including places like Wye, medical sites etc), two ballot box staff at standard "union rates" and two days of 8 hour voting - looking at about ?3k to ?4k depending on turnout for a paper ballot.
This does not include using agency staff where wages would double at least, hire of ballot boxes, printing separate ballots for each post or the hire of counting staff and travel costs.
So worst case scenario could mean a central cost to ULU of around ?15k per election using those criteria, I reckon.
That's just rough anyway...
E-voting is the future - but the technical glitches HAVE to be ironed out.
Imagine if you go to a paper ballot voting station, asked the staff for a ballot paper and they said, "You not allowed to vote, error!.. error! Call my superiors on this number."
This is what is happening with evoting and it just won't do. It puts people off voting for life. This is a serious problem. Those incompetant software programmers who got paid ?60,000 for this system must be held responsible and criminal charges should be brought against them. This is an absolute disgrace.
Were the calculations based on having one "site" for Bloomsbury, i.e. ULU itself and only placing ballot boxes at locations more than say 0.5-1 mile from ULU?
In my view an electronic ballot box at physical locations may be more worthwhile. You scan your college ID card in with some sort of barcode thing connected to a PC, which recognises the college ID number and then you vote with a touch screen or mouse. I'm sure that the existing system could be adapted to enable this. Any duplicate votes would be wiped out due to depuing the ID numbers.
Vote Ben Cohen for President
I'm all for e-voting, but there are certainly issues. Not ones that should stand in the way of marginally competant programmers (at least on this scale - ask Bruce Schneier what he thinks about wide scale e-voting).
Using college ID numbers can't work easily; not all CIDs are student ones (some are staff), and college are reluctant to provide information linked to CIDs outside of their own network due to data protection issues.
As I said before, when students register as a Union member, they should have to provide an electronic point of contact, and that point of contact should be tested before a card is issued (ie. an email with a reference number sent to it, the reference number is needed to get your union card). That way, you can centralise all union electronic services to have a single login, and the major problem with ULUs system (passwords not being emailed to people due to broken / illegible email addresses on application forms) is removed.
I must say I wasn't around when e-voting was introduced but what involvement if any did IC students play? I've personally found the most useful ideas and contributions to have come from IC students and this board! I'd hope to include you all in an enquiry etc (if I win of course!)
Vote Ben Cohen
Yes, sporty, electronic registration is being looked at for next year. None of these problems are insurmountable (as has been correctly identified the accuracy of data input is the biggest issue) but they have to be done step by step. The first step was to merge the union cards - which has given us a bigger say in helping drive the future of the process. ULU was never in a position to collect registration details electronically - it can only do so by developing a solution for each College.
I see the results aren't up yet.
Not surprised after the farce that was the announcement of the results...
I didn't make it to the results but from what Josh (Men's Officer) told me, there were only around 300 votes. I'm really disappointed, not just that I didn't win but also the low turnout considering how hard we all worked.
Matt was elected by 0.1% of the total student population. I hope that he can do something in his year to increase the turnout, if not can we really justify the union or its elections at all?
not at all... I'm pleased for Matt, he's a nice guy. I've enjoyed the whole thing and learnt a lot and contributed a bit (I hope) to the future of ULU.
There really is no bitterness
Live! is a City & Guilds Media Group Publication and editorially independent of City & Guilds College Union.
© 1999-2008 C&G Media Group