Re: [messengers] CMWC OPEN FORUM AGENDA

Date: 28 Apr 2014 17:24:48 -0000
From: matteo castronuovo <m.castronuovo@xxxxxxxxxx>


It would be interesting if we allowed the cities that wish to apply for the
CMWC to send via email 1 month before the start of their event a detailed
presentation of the event, enablaling those who wish to read the
presentation the possibility to download it.

It would also be useful to assign a point system to the presentations, thus
facilitating those who vote.

Obviously these presentations will be used during the open forum.


2014-04-28 16:09 GMT+02:00 Andy Zalan <zalandy@xxxxxxxxx>:

> My idea:
>
> Keep the initial Open Forum, but forget the 2nd one altogether.
>
> Instead, at the start of the Awards Ceremony, all bidding cities get up and
> make one last, brief presentation to win over undecided voters. All
> registered participants get a numbered ballot slip (same as their race
> number) in their registration packet. A ballot box is made available
> beginning at the end of the initial Open Forum until the end of the Awards
> Ceremony - people have until then to cast their vote. Or more specifically,
> make it say, 15 minutes after the final presentations, so that the votes
> can be tallied and announced by the end of the Awards Ceremony (votes may
> be tallied as they are cast during the weekend, so that it doesn't all have
> to get counted at the Awards Ceremony). No proxy votes, just one available
> vote per attendee that they have to personally submit.
>
> To take that idea even further, the ballots could be accompanied with the
> Open Forum agenda items which need to be decided on. This addendum could be
> created at or after the Open Forum and distributed later that evening
> and/or during the course of the rest of the event. Again - only one ballot
> per racer. So often the Open Forums get bogged down in heated debate. If we
> eliminated the need to come up with "the answers" - voting on the issues,
> voting on if we should vote, etc. - the Open Forums would just be about
> raising the questions and concerns, and offering possible solutions.
> Perhaps this would make the Open Forum run smoother and more efficiently,
> and we could be more satisfied we gave all attendees a fair and equal
> chance to exercise their opinions.
>
> I'm pretty sure we abandoned the consensus method soon after Buffalo Bill
> stopped attending, but I don't know if the by-laws were ever amended to
> reflect this. It's been a straight majority rules vote for many years now.
>
> I am also pretty sure that the by-laws were amended to allow for the IFBMA
> council to take decisions amongst themselves on certain matters during the
> year, outside of an actual CMWC. If not, there must be a provision for
> this, in the case that some timely issue comes up that needs to be
> addressed before the next Championships.
>
> I have some other ideas but that's all for now.
>
> AZ
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Shawn bega Blumenfeld
> <shawnbega@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
> > on several occasions, the 2nd open forum has been scheduled for sunday
> > but on at least some of those occasions hasnt successfully happened
> > for various reasons such as lack of organization or lack of interest
> > or people being already drunk or the finals ran late and the forum was
> > scheduled for a time when the bunny hop was still going on and thats
> > not really fair. and thus the forum has been suddenly moved to some
> > other unplanned time and location. it is my belief that if it is
> > scheduled for sunday, it should happen for real on sunday.
> >
> > its not really supposed to be a "vote". its supposed to be a consensus
> > (which is not the same thing as a unanimous decision - consensus means
> > that no one wishes to block the decision which means everyone accepts
> > the "vote" not necessarily agrees with it - it rarely happens after
> > only one vote). at least as recently as chicago, a motion was made to
> > change it from consensus to a straight vote but that proposal was
> > tabled and has been tabled at at least 3 open forums that i remember.
> > i would suggest that it has gained more headway recently, and at least
> > a couple of times, the vote has been taken this way as a single vote,
> > not necessarily for the worse at those forums. truthfully if at least
> > most people walk away thinking it was at least somewhat fair, youve
> > done at least somewhat of a good job.
> >
> > proxies should be eliminated. whenever you have the forum, people who
> > want to participate should show up. at different forums, proxies have
> > been treated differently with little if any consistency.  proxies dont
> > function in a consensus format. they barely work in a voting format.
> > they cause controversy and breed uninformed and uncaring voters.
> >
> >
> > im really excited to see people having these sorts of conversations.
> > ive always personally believed that having the conversation is more
> > important than the final decisions.
> >
> > --
> > Shawn "bega" Blumenfeld
> > http://www.dcbikeracing.com
> > --
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 2:11 PM, london courier emergency fund
> > <londoncourieremergencyfund@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > PROPOSAL FOR A CHANGE TO THE VOTING SYSTEM OF CMWCs
> > >
> > >
> > > I have spoken to quite a few people who feel the system is not as good
> as
> > > it could be.
> > >
> > > From what i know, the issue has been brought up before and apparently,
> > > nothing has been done about it because no one was bothered to do
> > something
> > > about it but i could be wrong and there could be other reasons.
> > >
> > > Having the 1st open forum at the beginning of the event is fine..people
> > > just arrive, they are fresh and ready to listen..so once the agenda has
> > > been brought up and discussed, get the bidding cities to do their
> > > thing..bidding cities should have some materials that people can look
> at
> > > through the event so whoever wasn't at the 1st open forum can catch up
> > and
> > > people can look through the materials over the weekend.
> > >
> > > The 2nd forum should ideally be on Sunday. On Monday,most people are
> > either
> > > gone or too fucked to attend so it doesn't make sense to vote then.
> > >
> > > It could be argued that people who are serious about voting should
> > arrange
> > > their trip to stay until then but the reality is that people
> don't/can't
> > > stay on Monday (especially if the CMWC is in Europe, countries are
> > closer,
> > > people head back Sunday night/Monday morning) so we should accommodate
> > that
> > > and have the second open forum on Sunday...
> > >
> > > The time when the main race finals are done and before the prize
> giving,
> > > when people are chilling and before the big party, would be ideal to
> get
> > > the bidding cities on stage again and remind people it's time to vote
> and
> > > give them a deadline to do so.
> > >
> > > Depending on logistics, there could be a couple of volunteers manning a
> > > ballot box for a few hours at the end of the day so participants have
> > > plenty of time to vote. Make it simple, give your rider's name/number,
> > one
> > > ballot paper, write the city you're voting for and cast your vote.
> > >
> > > We need to make sure this is done thoroughly so have a list of all
> > > registered participants and once they have voted, cross their names.
> > >
> > > During the prize giving, someone would be counting the votes..IFBMA
> > council
> > > members maybe, as organisers will be fairly busy and the winning city
> > would
> > > be announced once the prize giving is over and before the party start.
> > >
> > >
> > > People would be told in advance (ie on the website of the next CMWC
> > > organiser if this proposal goes through) that the voting system has
> > changed
> > > and what it involves.
> > >
> > >
> > > Any suggestions on this are appreciated.
> > >
> > >
> > > Stephanie
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Messengers mailing list
> > Messengers@xxxxxxxxx
> > http://ifbma.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/messengers
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Messengers mailing list
> Messengers@xxxxxxxxx
> http://ifbma.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/messengers
>



-- 


/////////////////////////////////////////////
Matteo Castronuovo
Marketing e Comunicazione

m.castronuovo@xxxxxxxxxx
ph. +39 3426853559
/////////////////////////////////////////////

0245558500

Urban Bike Messengers srl
c/o Avanzi, via ampère 61/A
20131 Milano
P.I.e C.F. 06891640960
 Consegniamo una Milano più pulita.

[image: Linkedin]
<http://www.linkedin.com/companies/996690><http://www.linkedin.com/companies/996690>[image:
Facebook]<http://www.facebook.com/#%21/pages/Milano-Italy/Urban-Bike-Messengers-Milano/72191458984?ref=ts><http://www.facebook.com/#%21/pages/Milano-Italy/Urban-Bike-Messengers-Milano/72191458984?ref=ts>[image:
Flickr] <http://www.flickr.com/photos/ubm/><http://www.flickr.com/photos/ubm/>[image:
Twitter] <http://twitter.com/urbanbm> <http://twitter.com/urbanbm>[image:
Youtube] <http://www.youtube.com/user/urbanbikemessenger>





<http://www.linkedin.com/companies/996690>