Why was it necessary to have "a majority of votes". If this is in our by-laws it should be changed. High vote getter should be elected. This extra exercise was unnecessary.

--------------

The voting booth software seemed to work quite well & seems quite secure. I was disappointed in the minimal number of persons exercising their "right" to vote (unless there are less eligible voters than I had imagined).

Knowing more about the jobs each candidate does - not just position, but projects they instituted, successes, etc. would be nice. Seemed there wasn't a lot of information of that nature.

All in all, I'm very pleased with USGenWeb - as an all volunteer organization, it does very well. LOTS of information & assistance out there for all to use!!!

------------------

I would prefer to see an "instant runoff"/"preference voting" system in place. I believe it is easy to understand it and gives voters more of a choice. It is also fairer and less subject to manipulation (fewer people generally vote in run-offs than in the original election).

-------------------

I would also like to see the EC maintain historical voting information, broken down by the voting regions, e.g. number eligible as well as number actually voting.
-------------------

You guys are a class act. This was the best election ever! Kudos to you all. You really did a magnificent job and should be commended!

------------------

But on a different note--if an SC does not send a voter list into the EC, then the volunteers of that state should be informed that they will NOT be allowed to vote, because their SC did not send in the list. The EC should NEVER go to a state or project and create the voter list
themselves. I am sure once the voters were told what their SC had NOT done on their behalf--you can bet changes would happen all of a sudden--and in a short while you would have that voter list in your hands. When the EC picks out the names themselves--then a dishonest SC can deny responsibility for an incorrect voter list. The burden should not fall on the shoulders of the EC.

Voters who register each year can be given a voter logo with yeardate to place on their webpage. "an, I register to vote sticker"

I would like to see volunteers register with the USGENWEB PROJECT as "club members" who vote in National Elections. The SC would give the thumbs up that a cc was a volunteer in that state. I think it would show great respect for the volunteers, who are adults, and can handle the job of registering themselves to vote --as they are USGenWeb Project members primarily-- and not just county coordinators in a state!!

ON another point. I would like to see vote tallies reported by state, and not just by region. Being at this time, most of our are state volunteers and treated as just state volunteers, I think we CCs should have knowledge of the "voter turn out" from our state project. But,
also, I would like to see it reported by candidate per state as well. It would be good for us to know that our state was active--or weak in voter participation in the project. (In the USA Government vote tallies, citizens can view vote counts per precinct, within a county). So this
suggestion is within reason.

Also the voters who register should be required to have the exact same email address on their webpage to be qualified.

Lastly, this is probably not in the EC dept.juridiction, I don't think,but I believe volunteers whose email address (as listed on their webpage) bounce, They should immediately be placed on probation and a member in not good standing until the situation is corrected and an
investigation is done. I just can't tell you how frustrating it is to find so many volunteers with bad email addresses on their county pages. It is a slap in the face to the good reputation of the project and others who try to do better. Keeping a current email address on your webpage is the least a volunteer should be able to do successfully. It makes me think that some of these volunteers are bogus CCs.

Thank you for a pretty good job this year !!
Linda was a great communicator!

--------------------

I would like to have seen a breakdown of votes per state per candidate. As a candidate myself, it would have shown me what states my strengths and weaknesses were in, also my opponents strengths and weaknesses. That would have been a big help in the campaign. Thank you, you all did a wonderful job, "a job well done" one you can be proud of!
-----------------

I wish all candidates had had their webpages ready near the beginning of the campaign - but I thought the webpages were very helpful in making a decision on a vote
------------------