Dormitories & Dragons
If you haven't considered it already, it's time to start thinking about organizing an election. If you're doing pretty well and no one is graduating, maybe you'll have the same officers run for the positions and nothing will change, but more likely, you're going to have people wanting to change jobs or step down, and you'll need to get someone in that spot in order to prepare for next year. This month, we'll talk about the election process and discuss ways to make sure the transition goes smoothly between changing positions.
Considering a New Campaign for Your Club, or Reviewing the Election Process
Before we start, realize that there are many different ways to hold an election; what I'm giving you here is one method that I've seen work for small- to medium-sized groups that are more or less informal. Also remember that the method outlined in your club constitution needs to be followed. Finally, this process becomes far more objective if the advisor is willing to assist. Most advisors don't, of course, and some advisors purposefully stay out of the process for various reasons, most involving the desire to see the students manage themselves. However, having the advisor there as an overseer of the process can help prevent and large bumps in the
Before you start electing people all willy-nilly, review your club constitution (if you haven't already) and see what it says about the election process and what positions are open. If any of this needs to be changed...well, it may be a little late for that--see my column last month for reasons and ways to alter the constitution. But assuming no changes need to be made, the constitution should describe what positions are up for election and who may run.
Remember that you want to keep this process as simple as possible, but you also need to fulfill the requirements of the constitution. This is why I warned you in earlier columns about having lots of elected positions--hopefully, you have lots of people in your club who want to participate and are willing to do so. However, it's more common to have only a few who might want to, and you may end up trying to beg someone to fill a position you really need filled.
The elections process should actually take place at least a few weeks ahead of time--ideally, at least one month. Before you announce elections, though, it would likely be helpful for the current officers to write up what they feel the requirements and duties of the position are. This way, when they're asked to explain what they do to the group, they'll have at least a basic answer ready. It also helps because you can take that document and distribute it to others via the listserv. The officers should be aware that, while they want to make their position sound attractive to prospective officers, they also shouldn't gloss over the more difficult bits--the treasurer will have to have time to schedule regular meetings, for example, and the secretary will likely be a busy person. Don't lie to the members, but don't make the position sound like accepting the position is a one-way ticket to administrative hell. Take a little time to proofread and organize these, then bring some copies to the meeting or distribute them over email.
The first meeting, you should let the general members know that it's time for elections, and the officers who are up for election should explain what it is they do and answer any questions the general members might have. This is one of those times where you want to keep the tone of the meeting focused and civil; it's easy for people to start making wisecracks, and pretty soon, a three-minute presentation is stretched to ten and everyone gets bored. After everyone presents their position, open the floor up to general questions, then let them know when you'll be taking nominations.
Opening and closing nominations really are up to you (though your constitution might have a process set, which you should follow.) Most informal groups will take nominations on the day of elections, and most groups will allow you to nominate yourself, avoiding the embarrassment of someone wanting to run, but not having anyone nominate them. Likewise, very few groups will require some sort of application process for prospective nominees, so don't worry about people needing ten signatures or something like that. You want to make this as open as possible so people who want to participate feel encouraged to. If you're taking early nominations, make sure to set a closing date so people can start taking the nominees under consideration--that's the purpose for having early nominations, after all.
It's also a good idea at this time to establish when the transition will formally take place. I've seen most groups hold their elections during the last meeting of the year in order to minimize the amount of time between elections and the transition, but the problem with this is that everyone then leaves for the summer or graduates, which might put the new leaders at a disadvantage since they might not be able to get a hold of the former officers in order to understand what's required of them. At the same time, it makes some amount of sense to give the current officers until the end of the year to hold on to their positions, as it's a more natural time to break and reset the club's leadership. Personally, I recommend having at least two general meetings between the election and the transition of power so the new leaders can talk with the old ones and get a sense of what's going on before they're thrust into position. Further, it gives the new officers a chance to shadow the old ones and learn from observation.
Preparing to Pass the Screen, or Holding Elections
Before election day, make sure the secretary is sending out emails reminding people to show up and vote. It may help if you offer some other benefit to showing up, like free pop or pizza, but in some ways, it's better if you don't, since people who show up will already be invested in the outcome. No matter what you do, make sure you let everyone know at least a week ahead of time when the elections will be and what they'll be voting on. You also want to make sure that everyone who was nomiated/wants to run for office should be present, as there will likely be questions asked.
On election day, you want to follow a set procedure for all candidates. I recommend the following process be used, then I'll go through it again and explain the advantages throughout so you can see the reasons behind them:
- Each candidate has two minutes to explain why they want the position and what they plan to do with it.
- If desired, each candidate can be allowed one extra minute to address points the others have brought up.
- The floor is opened to questions from the general members. Questions can be directed at one candidate, who may answer, or all candidates, who should be given the same amount of time to answer the question (usually one minute.)
- When there are no more questions, the candidates leave the room. The person in charge of administering the election (usually the president, though it could be some other officer, especially of someone is running for re-election) first opens the floor for general comments and discussion. Once everyone has agreed to end discussion, the officer hands out ballots. In lieu of ballots, people could simply write who they vote for on a piece of paper, fold it, and hand it in.
- Two officers (and preferably the advisor) leave the room with the ballots and count them in a private area. The candidates may re-enter the room at this point. Once tallied, the officers will return to announce the winner.
- In the event of a tie, the tied candidates will receive two extra minutes to persuade people of their position, and the floor will be re-opened for questions. Then the voting process will be repeated. If there is still no winner, the winner will be determined by a card pull from a poker deck, with the highest card winning the election.
Let's re-examine these parts to see why this process can generally work.
- Each candidate has two minutes to explain why they want the position and what they plan to do with it.
- If desired, each candidate can be allowed one extra minute to address points the others have brought up.
You want to limit the time for the candidates so you can eliminate pointless rambling and time-wasting. If the cadidates want to waste the two minutes cracking jokes, that's their right, but you also have the right to limit the amount of time they do so. Two minutes is usually enough time to get basic ideas and goals across to people. Hopefully, they won't take this time to attack their opponent, and you should remind the nominees beforehand that the point is to state why you are the best candidate, not why the other person isn't. If candidates really feel the need to attack each other, the one-minute extension should give them enough time to rebut any such claims.
- The floor is opened to questions from the general members. Questions can be directed at one candidate, who may answer, or all candidates, who should be given the same amount of time to answer the question (usually one minute.)
Since this process will likely not generate a huge amount of animosity between people, there shouldn't be any need to ensure equal speaking time. However, if one candidate gets asked a lot of questions, it would be fair to make sure the other candidates get a chance to answer them if they choose to. If the questions are directed at all candidates, you should limit the time just to make sure everything moves along properly. In this vein, you might close off questioning if the questions start getting too silly--"What is your position on killer DMs?" is funny, but encourages everyone to lose focus.
Also note that candidates are not required to answer questions put before them. This is an election, not a testimony before a jury. As long as the questions are reasonable and respectful, this shouldn't be an issue, but people who start treating the process like an inquisition should be asked to leave the room--now is not the time for a hurt ex-boyfriend or girlfriend to start airing dirty laundry or trying to embarrass a nominee.
- When there are no more questions, the candidates leave the room. The person in charge of administering the election (usually the president, though it could be some other officer, especially of someone is running for re-election) first opens the floor for general comments and discussion. Once everyone has agreed to end discussion, the officer hands out ballots. In lieu of ballots, people could simply write who they vote for on a piece of paper, fold it, and hand it in.
You want to give the members a chance to discuss any issues or concerns they might have away from the candidates so people can discuss the options frankly without worrying about hurting people's feelings. This shouldn't be a chance for people to debate ideas--you're electing officers, not voting on reform laws. However, sometimes relevant information doesn't get a chance to be said beforehand, and you want to make sure it gets that chance here. If people decide that there are more questions they want to ask, the candidates can be brought back in and given another minute each to respond.
The actual election should be done by secret ballot. Some people might claim that all voting should be done publicly so no one has anything to hide, but no one wants to be that lone hand in the air when voting, and no one certainly wants to see no hands in the air when they're asking to be elected to a position. Secret ballots provide a record (if necessary) and make people more comfortable voting who they want as opposed to who is popular. My experience is that people who have problems with secret ballots are often looking to pressure people to vote their way or have trust issues with the people in charge of the group. In either case, it's a matter of putting personal interests before the group's, and that's not a positive force to have entangled with the elections. This is another reason why having the advisor available is a good idea--the advisor's job is to ensure the group is focused, and can step in as an objective observer if people have these objections.
- Two officers (and preferably the advisor) leave the room with the ballots and count them in a private area. The candidates may re-enter the room at this point. Once tallied, the officers will return to announce the winner.
- In the event of a tie, the tied candidates will receive two extra minutes to persuade people of their position, and the floor will be re-opened for questions. Then the voting process will be repeated. If there is still no winner, the winner will be determined by a card pull from a poker deck, with the highest card winning the election.
The group doesn't need to know what the vote tally was, so all the officers should do is count the votes (twice, if necessary or the vote is especially close) and announce who won. All candidates should be congratulated, if only because they were willing to be active participants.
In the event of a tie, you want to give the members a chance to sort it out themselves, which is why you give the candidates another chance to speak and answer questions. No one wants an election to be determined at random, but at the same time, someone has to be in charge, and you don't want people to feel like they were pressured to change their vote. If the members can't clearly pick one person over another after two elections, it's obvious that a random method should be the fairest way to determine this. Some people might want to change the method of determination, such as by a roll of a d20, but I encourage the card method for a couple of reasons. First, buying a sealed set of cards beforehand is a trivial matter of a couple of dollars, so it's not a financial burden. Second, there are so many personal superstitions tied up in dice--especially in a roleplaying club--that using any given die for the roll gives some people the idea that they can suddenly become rules lawyers, and you don't want people arguing that the die has to roll so far before it's a valid roll, or that it has to stay on the table, or that each candidate should use their favorite die for the roll, or anything of that nature. Cards seem more objective in an RPG club, so I would encourage using those, though I recommend you use a new, sealed deck, shuffle the deck thoroughly, let each candidate cut the deck once, and stick to high numerical card with ace high--don't let suits factor into it, just to keep it simple. Ties should involve another pull of the cards without shuffling.
Some benevolent souls, seeking peaceful compromise that doesn't require anyone's feelings to be hurt, might suggest that the tied candidates share the duties of the office. This is a horrible idea. If the office is important enough to require an election, it's not the sort of position where you can afford to have two people bicker over differences in opinion. In addition, the officer should always know what's going on in their position, and having two people in the same job opens up problems with one person knowing something and not telling the other, or using the excuse "Taking care of that was the other person's job." The good of the group has to be considered, and because of that, there should be a winner to the election. However, assuming there's no hard feelings between the winner and the loser, the winner would probably be well advised to consider appointing the loser to some position of authority underneath them--after all, the person was a fairly popular choice and has proven that they want to participate more in the club. Maybe a little experience as head of a committee or other important task would be warranted, and would help establish the loser as a better candidate next year. This is especially good if the loser is a younger student and the winner is almost ready to graduate, as it can help groom the person for the position and give them leadership skills.
House Rules and Legacy Characters, or Dealing with Problems Old and New
Older groups may have certain traditions or expectations about the election process that need to be re-examined or considered. In the early days BGGS, for example, it was customary to require candidates to produce at least one election poster. The poster was often pretty silly, often proclaiming the nominee's ability to roll critical hits or describing the stats of their most powerful characters, but it was one of those expectations that was required of candidates. If this is the case in your club, you want to consider these before you announce elections. If these are written into the constitution, they're pretty hard to change, but you do need to decide if these should be changed or not. Harmless traditions might not need to be changed at all, but you should keep the process as simple and realistic as possible--some gaming geeks might insist that determining ties by having each candidate create a level 8 D&D character and fighting to the death is the only way to decide who is fit to rule might appeal to the gaming spirit, but it's not very efficient. Try to excise any unnecessary or unfair traditions before the process starts so everyone knows what the rules are.
Whether you're restarting an older group or guiding a new one through its first election, you should be prepared to deal with hurt feelings. It might seem like everyone in the group gets along fine, but everyone doesn't put themselves in front of their peers for public approval every week, and losing an election in a group where you feel you have a lot of friends is not always easy. As noted above, it makes sense to note who these people are and see if you can get them involved in some other leadership position, as they clearly want the experience. It can also help to remind people before the election that you don't need to be in an elected position in order to be a leader within it. It would probably also be helpful to note that few employers consider any leadership position within a gaming society, even president, to be a huge indicator of success and experience, so it's not going to be the resume builder some people might be hoping. In any event, this is another reason the advisor should be on hand, so everyone involved knows there's an objective person overseeing the process and is on hand to deal with any hurt feelings.
It's also entirely possible that you enter the election process with a divided club; some group of people consider themselves "revolutionary" or "the next wave of leadership" or some such and they're somewhat antagonistic in their approach to the club. If this occurs, it would be a good idea to have the advisor or, failing that, someone from the student affairs office handle the election personally to ensure the neutrality of the elections. The last problem your club needs is a re-enactment of the 2000 presidential election where half of your club ends up gritting their teeth and hating the other half until elections again, so do your best to head that problem off by getting election observers to ensure a fair vote.
You'll want to ease the transition period by quickly organizing a meeting between old and new officers, so the two groups can understand what unfinished business there will be and so they can have some input in any larger decisions that will affect their tenure. If you're having the new officers shadow the outgoing ones, remind the new officers that they're not officially the officers yet, so they don't get to dictate policy yet. However, do recognize that the outgoing officers are outgoing, and the new officers should at least be consulted so they aren't thrust into a position they need to backpedal on. If a clash of personalities or authority happens, however, the current officer is the person with the authority, not the officer-elect, and the position should be respected, if only because someday the incoming officer will be the outgoing officer, and they'll want the same respect in return.
One final thought: remember that in a democracy, your guy doesn't always win. If the process is handled fairly and everyone treats each other with respect, then there shouldn't be any issues. If your choice for candidate doesn't win, remind yourself that in five years, no one in the room will be here. It is in the nature of the college club to change regularly, and barring gross misconduct, the club will likely remain. Yes, it may hurt, but accept it and move on by trying to work with the people who did win. After all, you're all in this together.
March Checklist:
- Look over your club constitution to remind yourself of the constitutional requirements for elections.
- Discuss with your officers the election procedure and make sure any questions are figured out in advance. Notify the officers that they should prepare a statement for the members explaining the position and its requirements.
- Announce the elections at a general meeting and have each officer present their statements, as well as answer any questions the members might have. Also announce the nomination procedure at this time.
- Send out a reminder about the nominations one week before they are due. If nominations are taken during the elections, send out a reminder of the election two weeks, one week, and two days before they are held.
- If necessary, arrange for a neutral third party to administer the election.
- On election day, announce the election procedure to the members; it may help to make up some handouts for this so people can follow along and latecomers can understand quickly what will be done.
- Following elections, congratulate everyone for participating, congratulate the new officers, and arrange for a meeting between the old and new officers so everyone can transition as easily as possible.
It's hard to believe that this column has been up for a full year, but as we move into the thirteenth column, I just want to thank RPGnet for the chance to write this. I've always enjoyed the process of managing a game club, and ever since I left Bowling Green, I wanted to share my insights with others in hopes that we can strengthen an often disparate community that exists at many universities. This column gave me the chance to get these ideas on paper, and I hope they'll be of help to others who need it.
As far as the future of this column is concerned, we've gone through an entire year's worth of club issues already, and it doesn't make sense to repeat information I've already talked about just so new people will notice it. I have ideas for at least a few more columns, and I'll likely get a few more in the coming months, so expect to see more of me in the next year. As always, though, I like to get feedback, and I would also appreciate your ideas as to what you'd like to see here.
See you next month!
Alec "Kid Twist" Fleschner
