iClicker voting

[laurau]

Our org recently implemented using iClickers for voting, which means the votes are anonymous. Isn' this a huge violation of RONR?

[George Mervosh]

Our org recently implemented using iClickers for voting, which means the votes are anonymous. Isn' this a huge violation of RONR?

No.

Ballot votes are anonymous and proper.

If the votes are anonymous it sounds very much like a ballot........again, no problems under RONR.

[hmtcastle]

Our org recently implemented using iClickers for voting, which means the votes are anonymous. Isn't this a huge violation of RONR?

And, in fact, RONR discusses electronic voting on pp.404-405.

[Rob Elsman]

Our org recently implemented using iClickers for voting, which means the votes are anonymous. Isn' this a huge violation of RONR?

My knowledge of iClicker is limited, but I wonder what there is that would keep a person who is not actually present at the meeting when the vote is taken from casting a vote using the electronic system? Again, I'm not an expert on this, but I do have real concerns.

[hmtcastle]

My knowledge of iClicker is limited, but I wonder what there is that would keep a person who is not actually present at the meeting when the vote is taken from casting a vote using the electronic system?

See iClicker for details. The range is 200-300 feet. I suppose you could simply prevent the iClicker from leaving the room.

[jstackpo]

My concern is that there appears to be no way to cast a write-in vote - all the nominees must be identified (and numbered) before any voting gets under way for the system to work.

This is a severe restriction on the RONR authorized style of voting in an election.

[hmtcastle]

My concern is that there appears to be no way to cast a write-in vote - all the nominees must be identified (and numbered) before any voting gets under way for the system to work.

This is a severe restriction on the RONR authorized style of voting in an election.

Although nothing said so far suggests that this method is being used in an election.

[laurau]

No.

Ballot votes are anonymous and proper.

If the votes are anonymous it sounds very much like a ballot........again, no problems under RONR.

Thanks; I should have been clearer that they are not just being used for elections, where the ballots should be anon. They are being used for all business, including motions, amendments, etc.

[David A Foulkes]

Thanks; I should have been clearer that they are not just being used for elections, where the ballots should be anon. They are being used for all business, including motions, amendments, etc.

Has anyone else raised any objection, or expressed any concern about this, or desire to do things the "old fashioned" way?

[Gary Novosielski]

Thanks; I should have been clearer that they are not just being used for elections, where the ballots should be anon. They are being used for all business, including motions, amendments, etc.

Then it sounds fine. It's certainly no worse than a voice vote or a show of hands

The only time you'd have a problem is if the society wanted to do a roll-call vote, which is the only type of vote that records the way each person voted by name, but that's not recommended at all unless you are a representative body, where each voter represents a constituency that needs to know how their representative voted.

For elections, the clicker can't be used if it can't do write-in votes. But you can always go back to paper ballots for that.

In general, this falls under "Methods of Voting" and your society can make decisions on voting methods by a majority vote any time it wants to, right up to the point the vote is taken, and in some cases even immediately after.

So if you think some particular situation would be better served by some other method, you can move to use that method, and take a vote to see if the group agrees.

[Tim Wynn]

I know iClicker isn't a ballot, but RONR(10th ed.), p. 399, l. 3-6 sets forth a principle that IF a vote is INTENDED to be SECRET, the method of voting cannot be changed to a form that is not secret.

[Gary Novosielski]

I know iClicker isn't a ballot, but RONR(10th ed.), p. 399, l. 3-6 sets forth a principle that IF a vote is INTENDED to be SECRET, the method of voting cannot be changed to a form that is not secret.

Right, but the OP's concern seemed to be the other way 'round--that normal methods of voting, voice, rising, etc., which are not intended to be secret (but in a crowded room can be fairly anonymous) were being replaced with an electronic device that created anonymity as a byproduct, even if that was not its primary intent.

And I don't think there's any principle that says a quasi-public vote can't be changed to a method that's more private.

[Tim Wynn]

And I don't think there's any principle that says a quasi-public vote can't be changed to a method that's more private.

Neither do I.

[Weldon Merritt]

For elections, the clicker can't be used if it can't do write-in votes.

It could if the bylaws prohibit write-in votes.

[Gary Novosielski]

It could if the bylaws prohibit write-in votes.

But not if they also prohibit clickers.

[Tim Wynn]

It could if the bylaws prohibit write-in votes.

Shouldn't you be scaring off more committee members?

[Gary Novosielski]

Shouldn't you be scaring off more committee members?

He could, unless the bylaws prohibit it.

No rule in RONR prohibits the scaring of committee members, provided Halloween is imminent.

[Weldon Merritt]

But not if they also prohibit clickers.

Well of course not. But in that event they couldn't use them for anything else either unless the bylaws happened to only prohibit using them for elections, which would be pretty unusual. More likely, the bylaws say nothing at all about them (hence the OP's question). And for the sake of completness, I will say that I have no idea whether the bylaws of the OP's organziation do or do not prohibit write-in votes. My point was that your statement that the clicker can't be used for elections was not necessarily true in every instance.

[Gary Novosielski]

My point was that your statement that the clicker can't be used for elections was not necessarily true in every instance.

Few statements are.

[laurau]

Has anyone else raised any objection, or expressed any concern about this, or desire to do things the "old fashioned" way?

Yes, many members were aghast as we are elected representatives of various constituencies, and now when controversial items (policies, etc.) come up, no one knows how senators have voted. I know we can call for a show of hands ("division")or a roll call, but this suddenly became SOP at our first meeting (new chair, new executive committee).

[Gary Novosielski]

Yes, many members were aghast as we are elected representatives of various constituencies, and now when controversial items (policies, etc.) come up, no one knows how senators have voted. I know we can call for a show of hands ("division")or a roll call, but this suddenly became SOP at our first meeting (new chair, new executive committee).

Well, you might have mentioned that little detail earlier!

If you are elected representatives with a constituency, then anonymous voting is completely inappropriate, and your bylaws ought to require a roll call vote, sometimes called the "Yeas and Nays" for any substantive motion. In fact I would not be surprised if they already do.

How can your constituency hold its representatives accountable if they don't know how they voted?

[laurau]

Well, you might have mentioned that little detail earlier!

If you are elected representatives with a constituency, then anonymous voting is completely inappropriate, and your bylaws ought to require a roll call vote, sometimes called the "Yeas and Nays" for any substantive motion. In fact I would not be surprised if they already do.

How can your constituency hold its representatives accountable if they don't know how they voted?

'Oops; so sorry. Obviously I'm new at this!

Here's what our bylaws say:

3.493 The latest edition of "Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised" shall prevail at all meetings of the Faculty and its Committees. "

Then, at our sept. meeting, the clickers were introduced. Here's the revised minutes:

Chair x stated that, in response to the x org survey, the X Org Executive Committee had deemed voting with Clickers more efficient and wanted to use Clickers for votes on the Academic Senate. In the course of the discussion, it became clear that this would apply to all votes, not just those that were previously secret votes. Senators Y and Z argued that with Clickers, votes are no longer transparent and senators can no longer be held responsible for their votes by their constituents. Vice Chair XX responded that any senator could at any point request a roll call vote. A motion to do all voting by Clicker was presented, seconded, and approved.

So wher in RRs might I find relevant wording?

thanks for all your guidance on this; I apologize for any confusion....

[Gary Novosielski]

'Oops; so sorry. Obviously I'm new at this!

Here's what our bylaws say:

3.493 The latest edition of "Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised" shall prevail at all meetings of the Faculty and its Committees. "

Then, at our sept. meeting, the clickers were introduced. Here's the revised minutes:

Chair x stated that, in response to the x org survey, the X Org Executive Committee had deemed voting with Clickers more efficient and wanted to use Clickers for votes on the Academic Senate. In the course of the discussion, it became clear that this would apply to all votes, not just those that were previously secret votes. Senators Y and Z argued that with Clickers, votes are no longer transparent and senators can no longer be held responsible for their votes by their constituents. Vice Chair XX responded that any senator could at any point request a roll call vote. A motion to do all voting by Clicker was presented, seconded, and approved.

So wher in RRs might I find relevant wording?

thanks for all your guidance on this; I apologize for any confusion....

A member can move that a vote be taken {a} by ballot, {b} by roll call, or {c} by a counted standing vote. This group also includes a motion {d} that the polls be closed or reopened in a ballot vote. All these motions are grouped under the heading of Motions Relating to Methods of Voting and the Polls. [RONR (10th ed), p. 273-75.]

[Tim Wynn]

A motion to do all voting by Clicker was presented, seconded, and approved.

This sounds like a special rule of order. I'm assuming notice wasn't given, so I'm assuming it is null and void.

If such a special rule of order had been properly adopted, I would say the rules would have to be suspended to use another form.

[This assumes that "clicker" is regarded as a form of voting that would conflict with any other form of voting.]

[Josh Martin]

If you are elected representatives with a constituency, then anonymous voting is completely inappropriate, and your bylaws ought to require a roll call vote, sometimes called the "Yeas and Nays" for any substantive motion.

Or more sensibly, establish a rule that some minority of the assembly may order a roll call vote, so that there is no need to quibble over what constitutes "a substantial motion."

And of course, the suggestion that "anonymous voting is completely inappropriate" for an assembly responsible to a constituency is Mr. Noveosielski's opinion on civics, not a rule of RONR.