When most people think of voting, the determining tally most of us think of is a simple majority. That is, whoever receives one more vote than half the number of voters is the winner.
Articles and Thoughts on Audience Response Applications
When voting is mentioned in the United States, it’s a fair assumption that most people take that to mean that one person equals a single vote. After all, it’s the foundation of our system of democracy, right? Well, sort of.
In a political system that prides itself on the privacy of the vote, such as ours in the United States, it might seem unethical to assign your vote to another person because you can’t be present to cast it yourself. However, when the U.S. was little more than a collection of colonies with sparsely populated settlements, this process was tolerated – and sometimes encouraged – purely out of necessity.
Think about the last time you participated in an off-year election for your state or local municipality (let’s hope it was the last time one was held).
Discussions about voting don’t seem like they’d often turn toward houses of worship. But just like any large organization that depends on the governance of its members to run, religious organizations are faced with several the same challenges.
From the outside looking in, churches might not seem to be the sorts of places where the process of voting regularly comes into play.
But anyone who has worked within a religious organization understands that along with matters of the soul, houses of worship regularly deal with more earthly challenges that involve the approval of church leadership, the setting and passing of budgets, and the care of a physical plant in the form of the house of worship and its accessory buildings.
When it comes to voting and accuracy, smaller associations and governing bodies have a decided advantage. Whether voting by voice, ballot or show of hands, it’s unlikely that anyone’s vote will get overlooked or improperly counted.
The nominating process for political office is, in many places, mired in traditions that don’t lend themselves to efficient and accurate voting.
As we gradually learn more and more about the extent to which foreign governments might have tampered with the 2016 election in the United States, governments and organizations that depend on voting are understandably concerned about how they’ll be affected by ongoing security issues.
Because the American system of government is one that relies on democratic principles, the system of governing by majority rule has naturally carried over into the non-governmental realm of our boards and associations.
The acceptance of electronics in the modern classroom is one that has proven a boon to students, who can more easily transcribe notes and access Internet-based source material being used in a lecture. Inversely, they have also become easy distractions from ongoing lectures. Random web searches, gaming or consumption of unrelated media could be taking place if they aren’t properly engaged.
One of the signs of a civilized society is the establishment of governing bodies to set and enforce rules for communities.
A modern version of this is the neighborhood homeowners’ association, which has emerged from the suburban expansion of housing developments and condominiums during the late 20th century.
There’s a reason fraternities and sororities refer to the first few weeks of college as “rush.” For those hoping to join a Greek organization at their school, it’s a fun but also hectic, stressful time.
The modern business environment has benefitted in myriad ways from advancements in technology. But there’s one real in which many boardrooms are still stubbornly stuck in the 20th century – voting.
It’s no secret that being a doctor is a high-stress career. The constant pressure of making life-and-death decisions, as well as those that might have long term effects on not just patients, but also their families and loved ones, can wear down even the toughest professional.