President: Jré Sarenac
- Yes: 99
- No: 5
VP Communications: Bertrand Ong
- Yes: 103
- No: 6
VP Internal: Richard Lo
- Yes: 90
- No: 9
VP Social: Karen Lee
- Karen Lee: 94
- Luke Yin: 15
VP Volunteering: André Malan
- André Malan: 64
- Nan Jiang: 31
- Jordan Chin: 19
VP External: Jeremiah Tantongco, by a very narrow margin
- Jeremiah Tantongco: 53
- Mubashshir Zakir: 51
Treasurer: Melissa Smith
- Melissa Smith: 59
- Bobby Kim ^_^: 44
- Benjamin Israel: 26
Secretary: n/a. The two candidates tied, so it is up to the next executive team to appoint a secretary.
- Christina Chan: 49
- Eva Lam: 49
Candidates can challenge the results by Sunday 11:59 pm. The VP External and Secretary races were especially close, so there may be another recount.
Congratulations to all the winners and good work from all of the candidates.
Edited 3/27 to add vote counts.
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
The official vote counts: http://thecube.ca/election2010results
http://thecube.ca is currently down as of 1:20pm, March 27, 2010, unfortunately.
Yet another example of Nepotism. Real sharp that, allowing slating without giving anyone except his friends notice.
@Karen: I’ve added vote counts in case that happens again (although considering UBC Blogs can also go down…)
@Anonymous: All candidates were told at the All Candidates Meeting (for which I was present), or via email if they were unable to attend, that slating was allowed. There was talk at one point that Nan Jiang was planning to run her own slate. Although I don’t really agree with slating in general, I think the extremely close VP External race shows that slating does not have as much of an effect when a non-slated candidate runs a strong campaign.
The allowance for slating should have been explicitly expressed when nomination forms were released NOT after they were due. Many potential candidates have already been turned away due to intimidation from “Cubers”. Slating could have somewhat helped with this problem.
Further, because “Cubers” are the people more likely to nominate themselves, they are better poised to start a slate regardless of whether they knew of the matter beforehand… This would leave the candidates leftover in the dust…
Regardless, the results should be respected and winning candidates congratulated. Let us only take this year’s election as a lesson for next year. Had the slating process been done properly, we could have had a much more active elections with even more exciting campaigns.
Regardless of whether or not slating would have been explicitly expressed during nomination forms, the same people would still have slated together.
Also, as a point of information, the allowance of slating was not decided until shortly before nomination forms were due. Any candidate could have asked the Elections Administrator regarding slating. I just happened to do it constantly until my question was answered – which was actually 2-3 days before the all-candidates meeting.
Any and all criticism regarding intimidation of potential candidates due to slating should be pointed at me, since I’m the one who started the slate. If you would like to discuss this topic with me in person, since I already have a good idea who Anonymous may be, I’d be more than happy to under the condition that you listen to what I have to say and attempt to see my point of view.