Someone looked into it and said there was "Compliance" - there was no harm and therefore no foul.
A couple of tweets and Facebook cover change - big deal or BIG DEAL.
The answer is important - feelings, reputation & democracy is involved.
The question speaks to a very real change in Society and what we have come to regard as "reasonable" behaviour. Is Social Media just a small new part of the real world or is it a whole new world where the need for new rules and new limits on behavior are just now being realized.
I know a little bit about computers - I worked for IBM after my UBC Commerce-Marketing degree - That first year of training was an intense blend of Systems Engineering and Business Administration.
A computer is in its simplest form a bunch of connections- silicon, wires, circuits and switches. Think of a light switch at your door. That is a simple computer. In one position it means function- the ability to see and do things, the other position it means money and energy saving. Add millions and billions of light switches and you get a modern computer with amazing power to change lives, remedy social ills, land cameras on comets and find a name, a number or any other bit of information faster and more accurately than ever before.
So does the recent Elections BC decision mean its over? I understand that they have nothing to do with determining any consequence of actions only to guide compliance, only to try - to do the best they can to help people do the right thing - whatever it is "the right thing" may be.
Does the decision mean the new rules about Social Media on Election Day were or are now well understood or applied and enforced properly and fairly?
Does the decision mean that everyone, especially those Candidates and Council members involved actually understand them, even now?
Mistakes were made - that much I know. I don't know what exactly those mistakes were. I don't understand whether the error was "What was done", "How it was done" or simply "When it was done" or maybe even a combination of those and other factors.
I have learned nothing from this mistake other than doing nothing saved me.
Was it really that simple?
Who should be the one to look at this in detail and give a reasonable explanation?
Who should seek to guide the community on difficult sensitive issues?
I appreciate your comments, Jim. Elections BC made a decision and we should abide by it. Unfortunately the haters out there are persistent, especially council members who have to work together for the next 4 years. It doesn't help matter when one or more councillors continues to post or spread hate. What was or not done is now over and the business of running the city must begin fresh and new.
ReplyDeleteThere were many actions by other candidates for Council and School Board that turned out to be wrong. I myself posted on election day asking that people get out and vote and not to forget School Board. I guess I was in contravention but I did it in all innocence and since I was not asking for support for myself I felt I had done nothing wrong. The Cedar slate had a third party fundraiser that was not identified as such but Stephanie Higginson contacted the Trustee Candidates about what
Elections BC told her about their faux pas. They were not subject to such derision nor should they be although they did bill themselves as SD 68 Trustees before they actually were and won't be legally until December 8. Very prophetic on their part though. The rules were very complicated this time out and we should take a step back and live by the decisions of Elections BC