[Lnc-business] more JudComm data

[Alicia Mattson]

Attached is the state-by-state breakdown of the Judicial Committee results
which were announced late at night on July 3.

I imagined that since I am not a candidate in this race, I could wait a bit
longer until I had time to do an audit of this data, as I did with the
At-Large data, before publishing it.  That way any numbers recorded here
which do not match a state chair's recollection of what they turned in
could be explained before the question even needed to be asked.

As always, the convention secretary has a long to-do list following the
convention.  There were pending deadlines that I wanted to make on other
subjects, so after I published more detailed At-Large info, I didn't take
up the JudComm audit yet.  The At-Large project took me large portions of
three days to complete, and I couldn't put off certain other projects that
long to do JudComm right then.

The LNC was already undertaking an email ballot to "recognize" the top-7
finishers anyway.  Now we know that motion did not pass, mostly due to
concerns that it would be a rule violation, but now it seems that the top-7
finishers are just declaring themselves to be the Judicial Committee,
though they did not meet the thresholds to be elected.

The LNC now has an email ballot for an independent audit of the Judicial
Committee results.

I dunno.  I'm just going to go ahead and put this out, even though I
haven't had time to audit it yet.

The JudComm tally happened without the intense time pressures under which
the At-Large tally happened.  I am HOPING that means fewer errors were made
in the tally, but we shall see.  We were all very tired by that point, so
that could prove to have been as big a challenge as the time pressures
were.  None of the participants in the tally were JudComm candidates.

I intend to conduct an audit of this data anyway, regardless of whether the
LNC motion for an audit passes.  I am not one of the candidates for
Judicial Committee.  I still have other things that should be done first,
but I think I can probably get to it within the next two weeks.  Just know
that if questions arise, the answers will have to wait until I can audit
this.

There's just so much activity about this subject that I'll go ahead and put
this out, for what it's worth.

-Alicia
-------------- next part --------------
   Attached is the state-by-state breakdown of the Judicial Committee
   results which were announced late at night on July 3.
   I imagined that since I am not a candidate in this race, I could wait a
   bit longer until I had time to do an audit of this data, as I did with
   the At-Large data, before publishing it.  That way any numbers recorded
   here which do not match a state chair's recollection of what they
   turned in could be explained before the question even needed to be
   asked.
   As always, the convention secretary has a long to-do list following the
   convention.  There were pending deadlines that I wanted to make on
   other subjects, so after I published more detailed At-Large info, I
   didn't take up the JudComm audit yet.  The At-Large project took me
   large portions of three days to complete, and I couldn't put off
   certain other projects that long to do JudComm right then.
   The LNC was already undertaking an email ballot to "recognize" the
   top-7 finishers anyway.  Now we know that motion did not pass, mostly
   due to concerns that it would be a rule violation, but now it seems
   that the top-7 finishers are just declaring themselves to be the
   Judicial Committee, though they did not meet the thresholds to be
   elected.
   The LNC now has an email ballot for an independent audit of the
   Judicial Committee results.
   I dunno.  I'm just going to go ahead and put this out, even though I
   haven't had time to audit it yet.
   The JudComm tally happened without the intense time pressures under
   which the At-Large tally happened.  I am HOPING that means fewer errors
   were made in the tally, but we shall see.  We were all very tired by
   that point, so that could prove to have been as big a challenge as the
   time pressures were.  None of the participants in the tally were
   JudComm candidates.
   I intend to conduct an audit of this data anyway, regardless of whether
   the LNC motion for an audit passes.  I am not one of the candidates for
   Judicial Committee.  I still have other things that should be done
   first, but I think I can probably get to it within the next two weeks.
   Just know that if questions arise, the answers will have to wait until
   I can audit this.
   There's just so much activity about this subject that I'll go ahead and
   put this out, for what it's worth.
   -Alicia
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Tally of 2018 Judicial Committee.xls
Type: application/vnd.ms-excel
Size: 32256 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20180716/63e5d077/attachment-0001.xls>