. . . the plebs finally get thrown some crumbs: after 8wks (sic), the # of Pacifica members; & after 2wks, how many have voted online (ElectionBuddy Inc.’s “online voting system”, by definition, excludes the paper ballots cast – a # never disclosed by the NES, & a deficiency of the NES’ website never acknowledged publicly by any of the automatons of the PNB Elections Cttee or the sleepwalkers of the PNB) – https://elections.pacifica.org (counter installed in the 3rd week of voting, towards the start of week-commencing M28Aug; this screenshot, early F1Sep2023, EDT), & https://electionbuddy.com/about/ . . .

~

[UPDATE: the original title, & below calculations, have been changed coz National Elections Supervisor Renée ‘safe pair of hands’ Peñaloza keeps changing the total membership at 30June2023, the record date of the delegates’ pseudo-elections. Presumably coz a few well-motivated peeps, who haven’t received their ballot, have presented evidence of their membership – peeps such as directors sleepwalkers Teresa ‘I’m so vicious I can slice you with my eyes, & as I’m so rich I shall mock you for being so poor’ Allen (KPFT listener-delegate), Adriana ‘point of point, madam Chair’ Casenave (KPFT listener-delegate) & Vanessa ‘the lists aren’t fit for purpose, but what can I do, I’m only a director’ Dixon-Briggs (WPFW listener-delegate), the last two having even just gone thru the process of being certified by the NES as candidates (sic). This month, the size of the electorate (& so the membership) given by the ElectionBuddy counter has changed at least 15 times: moving from 31 146 (F1Sep, if not a few days earlier) thru ‘148 (5Sep, EDT), ‘168 (7Sep), ‘170 (9Sep), ‘195 (14Sep), ‘201 (19Sep), ‘203 (20Sep), ‘215 (22Sep), ‘229 (27Sep), ‘235 (29Sep), ‘249 (30Sep), ‘248 (30Sep), ‘247 (30Sep), ‘250 (30Sep), ‘251 (30Sep), to 31 252 (30Sep), an increase of 106 – a sequence shown transiently on the NES’ homepage, https://elections.pacifica.org.

[Note, it’s one thing the Pacifica higher-ups thinking they have membership lists that can function as elector rolls, that they’re materially accurate – but it’s another thing when they’re tested, in a highly partial way, in the running of a public election. And it’s obvious that testing has to start earlier – much earlier! And as this is Pacifica, with its longstanding history of materially inaccurate record-keeping, the testing also has to be of the membership record-keeping system, & not only of its current, momentary content – this a crucial conceptual distinction never made publicly by any Pacifica decision-maker in the 2018 thru present period covered by PacificaWatch. Oh.

[And what sort of testing has to be done to evidence the credibility, or otherwise, of the content of the 10 membership lists? (The 10: 5 listener-member station lists; & 5 of staff-members, with the Radio Archives peeps in the KPFK list.)

[As a minimum, two exercises in sampling have to be done, & well before any election – work arranged by the station managers, supervised by the executive director. One exercise samples the 10 membership lists, & by trying to contact members this will notably indicate the proportion of false positives in the membership lists (former donors & staff who have never been culled – so getting a ballot for free). The other exercise is of the other pole, sampling the 5 donor lists & 5 staff lists, & seeing if those individuals appear in the membership lists; this notably indicates the proportion of absences, negatives, re the membership lists. As shown, each sampling exercise involves an other, in an attempt at reconciliation – a truly un-Pacifican procedure as it’s a test of authoritative corroboration of what’s claimed.

[Likewise, sampling: so anathema to NES Renée that the word never crosses her lips – except when she’s making her music. Knowing that management had done none, she chose the easy way out & did none herself. And remember, the last time Pacifica had an NES who was an accredited elections supervisor, Graeme Drew, an outsider to boot, he terminated the 2018 elections for reason of material inaccuracy, for the membership lists being so corrupted, & therefore also inadequate to serve as elector rolls:

“I am unable to reliably verify any of the applicants for candidacy due to the poor quality of elector lists […] the elector lists required to proceed with the election process remain incorrect and incomplete.

“Given this, I am unable to verify eligible candidates and proceed with the election.”

NES Graeme Drew letter to the Pacifica National Board (with copy sent to ED Maxie Jackson), 30Oct2018, page 2, original bold & underlining) – https://mega.nz/file/QRsBmKDZ#08vJfqQcRaOyhwnCrP_po1Yd8TiW7Sl_umf5zU9Knt4

[Obviously he was promptly fired by the directors – sleepwalkers even then. And this is the point: since NES Drew’s evaluation in 2018 of the 10 membership lists as materially inaccurate, not one person has even suggested (let alone claimed) that this detritus (no doubt including corpses) has been cleansed – let alone someone providing evidence to the public, not least to the Pacifica members themselves. Rationally, this is sufficient evidence to designate the current process a pseudo-election.

PacificaWorld remains opaque, the rulers countering transparency, be it thru incompetence or intent. Muddling thru. Treating Joe & Joanna Average as cash cows. Unable to think, to come up with a vision for Pacifica – a coherent basis informing plans to arrest a near-20yr continuous decline … plans with integrated content, coordinated implementation, & temporally nested. So, unable to transcend the necro-economics of the Golden Corpses with the bio-economics of the Network Development Plan. And, unable to grasp the nettle, the decisions have been made by others – creditors & state. So, reduced to manoeuvring to cling onto the seats they cherish so dearly – whilst all around they give up to the flames.

~

The numbers: in 2yrs, membership crashes 27%

In only 2yrs, membership has crashed 27%, the highest rate by far in such a short period (31252 ÷ 42663 = 0.7325). Taking a wider sweep, back to the year Bush beat Kerry, since 31Aug2004, membership has fallen 67% (31252 ÷ 95581 = 0.3269).

To put the current 31 252 in perspective, here’s the 2004 station split: KPFA 28 539, KPFK 21 503, KPFT 10 472, WPFW 13 942, WBAI 21 125.

All links at https://pacificaradiowatch.home.blog/non-financial-pacifica-data/elections/election-of-local-station-board-delegates-2003-present/, & https://pacificaradiowatch.home.blog/non-financial-pacifica-data/the-knell-pacifica-membership-passing-over-time/

The politics: the Pacifica secrecy culture is alive & well

As said, after 8wks (sic) the plebs were thrown some crumbs: two figures, the membership total, & the # of ballots cast online (so not the # of ballots cast). Have other strata in PacificaWorld received more info? Of course. The online balloting firm has all the online data, & that includes basic info such as the 10-way station split, so of the membership & of the ballots cast online. That means NES Peñaloza has it too, so no doubt she’s provided it all to the 21 directors sleepwalkers, & almost certainly to PNB Elections Cttee Chair Aki Tanaka (& so to the breakers high command – if not to all Cttee members), &, if only out of courtesy, to the person who hired her, ED Stephanie ‘The Breeze’ Wells (& so to the 5 station managers).

All these are privy to this basic info – but for those who fund the whole thing, those slumming it in the plebs rank, they deserve zilch. So get zilch. The Pacifica secrecy culture means that no disclosure of this basic info has been made by NES Peñaloza, PNB Chair Julie Clueless, Cttee Chair Tanaka, or ED ‘The Breeze’. Any of them could have told the other ~31 000 in PacificaWorld – but they all chose not to. They all effectively decided that the online balloting company would know more about what’s going on than almost all of the 120 Pacifica delegates & the ~31k Pacifica members.

Welcome to #PacFam, the Pacifica Family.

Note … a Pacifica member isn’t really a member: almost all are simply donors – plus volunteers, mostly staff

Using the term member is quite misleading. Yes, they have a vote (twice in 3yrs), & can run for governance (being a delegate), but that’s it, really. Unlike a membership organisation, there’s no ongoing structure offered to them – not even a register where they can give details of how they can help, of their experience, expertise, skills, knowledge.

The sad thing is, in functionally being donors, the great majority probably don’t even know they’re members, members of a corporation, members of Pacifica Foundation, Inc.

As it is, the ‘members’ are atomised – not structured. And the only status they really have is being a donor – except for those who volunteer, usually in programme production.

In other words, they’re left to their own devices. And treated as cash cows.

Maybe they’ll offer themselves. Maybe they won’t.

The result? We know all too well.

~~~