Amendment to cover new voters and challenges to ballots
Thanks to John Murphy for taking the time to write this out!
I - Voting Requirements:
Before any prospective voter will be allowed the franchise, the following prerequisites must be met.
1) The prospective voter must submit to the Ballot Committee (see section II below) reasons for and against the top ten candidate returnees from the prior election. Saying there is no case against a candidate is reasonable sometimes, like in the case of Cy Young, for example. A one-line statement for each may be all that is needed, but it needs to reasoned and logical, as determined by the Ballot Committee.
2) The prospective voter must be familiar with sabermetrical analysis and be willing to use a form of it within their ranking system. Any sabermetrical method (including, but not limited to Win Shares, WARP, etc.) is welcome. Any variation on an established system or a totally new analytical system created by the prospective voter himself/herself are also welcome (provided they are mathematically sound). While we are not looking for 100% consensus, we are aiming our sights on voters who are knowledgeable and scientifically minded.
3) The Ballot Committee will review each prospective voter’s qualifications and their compliance with the voter requirements, and if the requirements are met, the voter will be granted a ballot.
II - Ballot Committee:
The five-person panel will review any ballot that is challenged by a member(s). It will also review any new applications from prospective voters. It will consist of four voters, plus the commissioner. If there are more than four candidates for the committee, an election will be held. Term of office will expire after six elections (three months).
If one of the voters challenges a ballot (and is then seconded by another voter), it goes before the committee to be reviewed. If the committee decides to kill it, the group as a whole can then veto the committee’s action with a supermajority (67%) vote.
Valid reasons for challenging a ballot include (but are not limited to):
*Incompetence (voting for Tom Brookens, for example)
*Failure to comply with the rules (not explaining why you voted for Brookens)
If a ballot is nullified due to incompetence, the voter will be on probation for two elections and will have to reapply for membership.
If a ballot is nullified due to not complying with certain rules (no explanations on the ballot, ineligible candidates on the ballot, etc.), the voter will be allowed to revise his/her ballot without any penalties, if compliance is met.
For new ballot applications, the Ballot Committee’s decision is final.
When a committee member’s term is up, he may run for re-election (or have his membership re-upped if no one challenges him). The first four members of the committee will receive terms of 3, 5, 7 and 9 elections, so that we’ll have one spot coming open every other election (once a month in real time), and so that we don’t have complete turnover at any point.
I think we’ve come to the point where we have to formalize the process somewhat. Like any ‘company’ when there’s only a few people you don’t need much documented, but as things grow, more things need to be formalized. We’ve only seen a few minor issues to date, but as always, we try to nip things in the bud before they become problematic.
As always, feel free to comment, or offer up a better mousetrap if you have one! But no mousetrap isn’t an option any longer.
Posted: January 19, 2004 at 05:44 PM | 38 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark