ccjoan@aggie.ucdavis.edu (Joan Gargano) (12/11/90)
In article <203@darkstar.cs.utexas.edu> bunda@cs.utexas.edu (John Bunda) writes: >Does anybody have any idea what is *really* going on with these >elections? The candidates probably don't even know why they are doing it. I think it goes along with the escalation of egos, "professionalism" and competitiveness we have seen over the last few years. It used to be that local jumpers formed teams, made a few hundred jumps together and went to the Nationals. The rest of us jumped when we could and had a good time. Now teams are more commercial with multi-year commitments and have a thousand jumps together. Fun jumpers deal with the issue of commitment and how many jumps they make a year. This has probably moved into the Board elections. If you are really "committed" and "professional" you use marketing like "real" candidates do. I appreciate the time and effort people put into the USPA and am glad they take it seriously, but let's be real. USPA has maybe 20,000 members (many not active) in a country of 250 million. We're a very small group with a very narrow common interest. I agree with John. It's getting silly and people are taking this a little too seriously. Joan Gargano
ks@astra.ecn.purdue.edu (Kirk Smith) (12/11/90)
In article <9468@aggie.ucdavis.edu> ccjoan@aggie.ucdavis.edu.UUCP (Joan Gargano) writes: >In article <203@darkstar.cs.utexas.edu> bunda@cs.utexas.edu (John Bunda) writes: >>Does anybody have any idea what is *really* going on with these >>elections? It has got out of hand. In our conference, the incumbent conference director just happened to be chairman of the election committee. Up until about a week ago, he had been periodically getting vote tallies on his own reelection. At that point, the board figured out that wasn't the best situation, and ended access for the incumbent, and gave the challenger all the same information that had been given to the incumbent. The information was pretty interesting in that early on, both candidates were pretty close, but as time went on the incumbent pulled out ahead. As for why people are running. In our conference, I can tell you what I perceive. We haven't had a choice on conference director in maybe 10 years or so. The challenger in our election ran apparently (my opinion only): 1. To provide a choice on the ballot. 2. To provide better services to the membership. 3. To get more involved in critical national issues, such as dealing with the FAA. 4. To boost his own ego a bit. I think you will find #4 in a lot of the candidates in varying degrees, but I think that the other reasons are common as well. I am thankful that we have a choice in our conference, and I think it is a shame that many conferences only have one person running for the conference director. Competition can only improve the level of service provided by the elected officials. I think it is important that these elections are hotly contested and I am glad to see the interest rising in service in the national organization. Kirk Smith
dappel@grafted.UUCP (Dave Appel) (12/23/90)
bunda@cs.utexas.edu (John Bunda) writes: > Does anybody have any idea what is *really* going on with these > elections? In addition to the ballot and the usual spread of photos > and statements from the candidates in Parachutist, we are seeing some > real money being spent on campaigning this year, such as for a big, > *anonymous* ad in Skydiving to write in Mike Johnston for National > Director along with an endorsement of some others, and an actual > mailing (to all USPA members?) from one candidate (real $). > Hey, rich people have to spend their money on SOMETHING.