July 7 NEC 3 .pdf
Original filename: July 7 NEC 3.pdf
Title: July 7 NEC 3
Author: C Fawkes
This PDF 1.3 document has been generated by Word / Mac OS X 10.11.5 Quartz PDFContext, and has been sent on pdf-archive.com on 11/07/2016 at 01:00, from IP address 216.151.x.x.
The current document download page has been viewed 527 times.
File size: 33 KB (2 pages).
Privacy: public file
Download original PDF file
> FROM: Jessica Squires <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> SENT: Thursday, July 7, 2016 10:24 AM
> TO: Maureen Collins
> CC: Johanna Hove; Neil Burron; Stephen Mullen; A. Nemec; Alex Butler;
> Nick Giannakoulis; André Picotte; Sean Maguire;
> email@example.com; Nathalie Pothier; Pam Scholey; Jacob Porter;
> Chantale Desrochers; Simone Powell
> SUBJECT: Slate emails
> Sorry all, but I can't not respond to this. It isn't known, because it
> didn't happen.
> These positions are quite entrenched. Can we please leave this for the
> investigators report?
> I will refrain from further responses.
> On Jul 7, 2016 10:10 AM, "ME COLLINS" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Neil and Jessica,
>> It is now known that you made use of the ongoing voting results
>> obtained by Emmanuelle, via Insite, on your behalfs. That was wrong
>> and, no matter how you color it, negates your arguments about how
>> this was all okay.
>> Futhermore, as you well know, there is an implied endorsement when a
>> NEC member campaigns on behalf of a particular candidate. That
>> violates both the Constitution which clearly states that as a member
>> of the NEC you represent ALL of the membership and the decisions re
>> endorsements. It also flies in the face of the principles that the
>> Slate purports to represent.
>> Finally, Jessica, I did not ever request campaigning on my behalf by
>> any member of the NEC (and I'd be surprised if anyone thought Anne's
>> 'liking' my fb page qualified as same).
>> Jessica, I do concur on one point; no need to argue this further by
>> FROM: email@example.com
>> SENT: Thursday, July 7, 2016 9:41 AM
>> TO: ME COLLINS; firstname.lastname@example.org; Nick Giannakoulis; A. Nemec;
>> Alex Butler; Simone Powell; Jessica Squires; Jacob Porter; Pam
>> Scholey; André Picotte; Nathalie Pothier; Chantale Desrochers; Sean
>> REPLY TO: email@example.com
>> SUBJECT: Re: Slate emails
>> We never made a secret of the fact that we were campaigning, nor is
>> that against the rules. We had read the literature on
>> get-out-the-vote and were very scientific in our approach. We set
>> targets, counted supporters, and broke down the membership by
>> Department - just like we had done for the general NEC election. We
>> looked at turnout from previous elections and estimated margins of
>> victory. Anyone who knows about campaigning is familiar with these
>> techniques. There was no effort to steal the election - just to win
>> it. And of course we were unsuccessful.
------------------------FROM: ME COLLINS <firstname.lastname@example.org>
DATE: Thu, 07 Jul 2016 09:10:12 -0400
TO: Emmanuelle Tremblay<email@example.com>;
Powell<firstname.lastname@example.org>; Jessica Squires<email@example.com>;
Jacob Porter<firstname.lastname@example.org>; Neil
DesRochers<email@example.com>; Sean Maguire<firstname.lastname@example.org>
CC: Maureen Collins<email@example.com>
SUBJECT: Slate emails
So, folks, these were sent to me anonymously.
Very interesting reading, given that they discuss activity that is
counter to decisions made at the NEC table and by the ERC re
endorsing candidates. Particularly so, combined with some of the