Latest news with #IEO
The Herald Scotland
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Greens election official resigned over 'anomaly' in results
She said: 'Hi all, I just wanted to say a couple of things about the situation as I understand it. As I see it, I did two things wrong.' 'Not spotting the anomaly in the results spreadsheets when they were initially sent to me, the cocos of SOC and the cocos of ECC, as well as to staff.' A screenshot of the message, viewed by The Herald. (Image: NQ) 'Going along with a statement yesterday reassuring people that there were no realistic doubts about the results when I was not sure that that was the case.' It is unclear what the 'cocos of SOC and the cocos of ECC' refers to. Last night, The Herald received a statement from the Scottish Greens official communications team which stated: "The party's Internal Elections Officer has confirmed that the process and the methodology used are compliant with our selections procedure, and the lists published are correct. "The IEO has verified that the count was conducted using iterative rounds of STV, specifically the Weighted Inclusive Gregory method, and was done as a bottom-up process." However, Ms Joester later told members she had not approved the statement, and that she was standing down from her position. Today, she said: 'I was not aware that the statement had gone to the media at the point where I expressed my unwillingness to proceed with it. 'I think others involved thought I was aware. Either way, I think I needed to resign as IEO because I hadn't done a good enough job.' Party bosses have come under fire in recent years as a result of the Bute House Agreement. (Image: PA) 'I do not know whether or not there is a problem with the results,' she added in the message, sent at 2.31 PM on Tuesday. 'MiVoice [an electoral counting service] assured the party yesterday that they carried out iterated stages of STV with the votes of excluded candidates transferred between stages. 'That is the understanding I had about what we had asked them to do - while MiVoice were originally commissioned to carry out this ballot before my tenure as interim Internal Elections Officer, 'I have spoken to them to clarify what was needed over the past few weeks. They have offered to clarify their processes in due course, and I think we should wait until that has happened.' Activist Ellie Gomersall challenged Patrick Harvie for the top spot on the list. (Image: Ellie Gomersall) It is understood the party has been asked to review the count in Glasgow, after co-leader Patrick Harvie survived an attempt by activist Ellie Gomersall to remove him as the party's top candidate. It was also asked to review the count in the North East of Scotland, where MSP Maggie Chapman was ousted by former employee Guy Ingerson. A source inside the party told The Herald: ''Honestly, I feel bad for Kate. It's the s******* job in the party. That being said, she should have noticed the inconsistency in the numbers. I think resigning now is a cop-out though, she should have remained in post and fought for those raising issues, It's the IEO's job.' 'It looks like she has been thrown under the bus by the Executive, who have totally shirked their responsibility to oversee and ensure fair party democracy.' Read more: Maggie Chapman ousted as top Green candidate ahead of Holyrood 2026 Scottish Greens release statement on contests after members demand recounts Turmoil deepens as Greens elections officer quits in selection contests row Last night, party executive co-chairs Zoe Clelland and Carolynn Scrimgeour told members: 'We recognise the spreadsheets provided by the supplier may not be very easy to follow, even for members with experience of STV election results…' 'We plan to ask the supplier to provide further guidance and detail to ensure the results can be examined with maximum transparency. Please bear with us while we explore this with the external voting provider.' The Scottish Greens have been approached for comment.
Scotsman
2 days ago
- Politics
- Scotsman
Row breaks out over Scottish Green selection contest as key figure quits
The party insisted the process was 'compliant with our selections procedure' Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... A row has erupted in the Scottish Greens over the process of choosing candidates ahead of next year's Holyrood election. The party sought to reassure members the process was "compliant with our selections procedure" after questions were raised by concerned activists. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad However, shortly after this statement was released to the media, its internal elections officer, Kate Joester, announced she had quit. It comes after Maggie Chapman, a former co-convener of the Greens, failed to top the party's list for the North East region, meaning she is unlikely to be re-elected. Maggie Chapman | PA Ms Chapman sparked controversy earlier this year after accusing the Supreme Court of "bigotry, prejudice and hatred" following a landmark ruling on the legal definition of a woman. Elsewhere, Patrick Harvie, the Greens co-leader, saw off a bid from a 'radical' faction within the party to have him replaced as lead candidate in Glasgow. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The result of both selection contests had been questioned by some activists. A spokesman for the Greens told The Herald on Monday evening: "The party's internal elections officer [IEO] has confirmed that the process and the methodology used are compliant with our selections procedure, and the lists published are correct. "The IEO has verified that the count was conducted using iterative rounds of STV [single transferable vote], specifically the Weighted Inclusive Gregory method, and was done as a bottom-up process." But writing on the party's internal communications channel, Ms Joester said she had not authorised this statement. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad "To clarify regarding the statement to the press on members' concerns about counting irregularities: this did not come from me as internal elections officer and I am no longer in that post as of this evening," she said. The Greens later told members there had been a "misunderstanding about the sign-off" but insisted the original statement defending the process was accurate. The party said it had been shared with Ms Joester in advance.
The Herald Scotland
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Greens in turmoil as senior official quits in contests row
Ms Joester said she had not authorised the comments which had insisted the results were correct and had stood down from the post. "To clarify regarding the statement to the press on members' concerns about counting irregularities, this did not come from me as Internal Elections Officer and I am no longer in that post as of this evening," she posted on the party's internal communication channel last night. Her resignation then prompted the party to release a second statement which said there had been "a misunderstanding about the sign-off" of the statement to The Herald and that the information was accurate. READ MORE: "Several people have been in touch today about the methodology which has been used for counting the votes in our candidate selection process. We're posting tonight to provide more information to members," senior officials Zoe Clelland and Carolynn Scrimgeour told members in a message posted last night on the party's internal communications platform. "The content of the statement provided to and used by the press this evening is accurate, and had been shared with the Internal Elections Officer (IEO) in advance. Whilst there was clearly a misunderstanding about the sign-off that this had received which we apologise for, we stand by the content of the original statement and are therefore confident in its accuracy." They added: "The party's Operations Manager and former Internal Elections Officer were in contact with our external voting provider throughout our selection process, including to agree how votes were to be counted. Under our Selections Procedure, our candidate lists must be counted under a Single Transferable Vote (STV) system. "Upon receiving a number of enquiries today – it has been verified that the count was conducted using the Scottish STV system, specifically the Weighted Inclusive Gregory method, and was done as a bottom-up iterative process. "This is the process that the voting provider was asked to use. As the results came in from the provider, and before they were published, they were verified by the IEO and the rest of the Selection Board. The external voting provider have explicitly confirmed this included transferring the preferences of excluded candidates at each stage. We are content, therefore, that the voting process, and the results it produced, complies with the selections procedure. "We recognise the spreadsheets provided by the supplier may not be very easy to follow, even for members with experience of STV election results. We plan to ask the supplier to provide further guidance and detail to ensure the results can be examined with maximum transparency. Please bear with us while we explore this with the external voting provider. "To be clear, the party body responsible is satisfied that this process and the methodology used is compliant with our Selections Procedure; as such, all regional lists stand as they have been published." Shockwaves were sent through the Scottish Greens when the results of the candidate selection contests were announced. The race saw MSP Maggie Chapman ousted from the top place on the party's north east list by member Guy Ingerson. With polling suggesting the Greens will get just one MSP on the north east list, it means Ms Chapman, who was party co convener from 2013 to 2019, is unlikely to be re-elected to Holyrood in May next year. Ms Chapman came second behind Mr Ingerson, who used to work in her office. There has been tension between the pair since Mr Ingerson lodged bullying complaints against her. He claimed that Ms Chapman had badmouthed him to his new employer, Friends of the Earth Scotland — insinuating he was 'untrustworthy' and should be 'watched' — and had broken the party's code of conduct. The contest also saw the [[Scottish Greens]] co-leader Patrick Harvie see off a challenge from a radical faction in Glasgow to oust him as the party's top candidate in the city. The other co-leader, Lorna Slater, and Mr Harvie's ally Ross Greer also warded off challenges from radical Greens, claiming the top spot in Lothian and the West of Scotland respectively. Meanwhile, the party's leadership election is underway following a decision by Mr Harvie to stand down from his role as co-leader. Mr Greer is seen as the favourite to succeed him though he may face a challenge from the same group of Scottish Green eco-socialists, known as the Glasgow faction, who opposed Mr Harvie in Glasgow. They have been critical of how the Greens have operated in recent years, and opposed the Bute House agreement, which was a power-sharing deal between the SNP and Greens. It is understood that Ellie Gomersall, who was second placed on the Glasgow list, had concerns some votes were not transferred to her from candidates who were knocked out in earlier voting rounds. "Ellie has raised it with the party. She has asked for the count to be reviewed," one source told The Herald yesterday. Shetland Councillor Alex Armitage raised concerns about the count in the north east. "There's something that makes me feel uncomfortable and I want to flag it here," he wrote on a party internal communication channel which has been seen by The Herald. "I'm concerned about the selection process in the North East region, which I think should be thoroughly investigated by the party as soon as possible." The Scottish Greens and Ms Gomersall was contacted for comment.
The Herald Scotland
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Greens release statement as members demand recounts
A statement released by the party stated: "The party's Internal Elections Officer has confirmed that the process and the methodology used are compliant with our selections procedure, and the lists published are correct. "The IEO has verified, that the count was conducted using iterative rounds of STV, specifically the Weighted Inclusive Gregory method, and was done as a bottom-up process." The intervention follows questions today by members over how votes were counted. It is understood the party was asked to reviewed the count in Glasgow where co-leader Patrick Harvie survived an attempt by activist Ellie Gomersall to remove him as the party's lead candidate. It was also asked to review the count in the north east. READ MORE: Chapman Holyrood 'deselection' sends shockwaves through Scottish Greens Unspun: Scottish Greens could bring 'plague upon their house' through civil war Under pressure Police Scotland requests help from NI with Donald Trump visit MSP Maggie Chapman lost her top slot on the party's ranking list to Guy Ingerson. It is likely to mean she will not be reelected to Holyrood next May. The Herald has been told that Ms Gomersall, who was second placed, has concerns some votes were not transferred to her from candidates who were knocked out in earlier voting rounds. "Ellie has raised it with the party. She has asked for the count to be reviewed," one source told The Herald. "The party has asked them to give them a couple of hours to review the data so if they can work out if there are any errors. "There is concern that second preference votes may not have been carried as they should have been." Another contact: "The data isn't carrying forward for limited candidates second preferences and beyond so it's being treated like a FPTP election to an extent especially in the final round." Shetland Councillor Alex Armitage also raised concerns about the count in the north east where Ms Chapman was ousted from the top ranking slot by Mr Ingerson. "There's something that makes me feel uncomfortable and I want to flag it here," he wrote on a party internal communication channel which has been seen by The Herald. "I'm concerned about the selection process in the North East region, which I think should be thoroughly investigated by the party as soon as possible. "It looks to me that there is a bloc of around 50 votes cast in the North East which does not fit the patterns of voting in this and previous selection campaigns. "Maggie Chapman got around 50 more negative votes than would be expected for an incumbent MSP, and Guy Ingerson got around 50 more first-preference votes than might be expected. "Maggie Chapman's vote in 2019 was 44 first preference votes and 76 this year, an understandable increase given her incumbency. Guy Ingerson received 25 first preference votes in 2019 and this increased to 90 this year: a more than tripling of his first preference votes. This is despite the fact there was very little public campaigning in the North East Region. "Compare the situation to Glasgow or Edinburgh where places on the list were hotly contested; there was much less of a swing than the NE between incumbents and challengers. "The North East is also an outlier in terms of voter turnout. A significantly higher percentage of voters voted in the North East than any other region, despite very little public activity — see the graph. "Signing up friends and family to join to vote for a candidate is a common and legitimate tactic, but 50 seems way beyond what would be expected, or possible. "This may be all above board, in which case Guy has conducted a remarkable campaign and should be congratulated. But the degree of discrepancy in the data is extreme, and warrants an objective interrogation of the North East membership database. "Our integrity as a party is a hugely important aspect of our values and our identity as Greens. It is so important that we can trust and have confidence in our selection procedures. "I rarely speak out on internal issues but this just doesn't sit right with me at all. I'd like to move forward but before doing so I believe this should be properly scrutinised."
Business Mayor
13-05-2025
- Business
- Business Mayor
IDO's Have The Potential to Be Great for Average Investors. What's Holding Them Back?
The natural next step is to take what works with the IEO and improve it. The result? The Initial DEX Offering, or IDO. This is similar in some ways to the IEO, but instead of the exchange handling most actions, a third party launchpad facilitates the launch between the DEX, the project, and the customers. The token is already set up to launch on the selected DEX, so there are no issues in that regard. The marketing efforts are typically shared by the launchpad and the project team, the smart contract by the project team, and the vetting of investors by the launchpad. The need for AML/KYC varies by project, so there isn't a set rule for that element. How investors are whitelisted, however, is where the biggest elements are for an IDO. How a launchpad handles this element is one of the biggest issues with IDOs, but simply doesn't have to be. A typical launchpad has a reputation closely related to the projects it has launched. The variety of project vetting can vary wildly, but those top launchpads do their homework and protect their communities. A successful launch with happy investors works well for everyone. The rapid pace of an IDO can be intense, but is a natural consequence of this type of launch. Investors usually have to create an account, perform any vetting, and are then whitelisted based on a number of criteria. Many launchpads use this step to help boost marketing, requiring the whitelist process to include social media boosts of the project by those who wish to join. Since they already want to join, this is usually something they have already done or are happy to do to further boost the project visibility. However, the most controversial of these steps is requiring potential investors to hold large amounts of the launchpad's native token, which can amount to $10k-50k worth of tokens. Obviously, this massive buy in limits the majority of average investors and shuts the door to either institutes or wealthy investors. However, this also gives even these lucky few an additional element of risk, as this token can be volatile and create a loss before they even get to the project launch. Notably, this biggest issue is itself evolving, with advanced launchpads like choosing not to require any buy-in from investors. In fact, it doesn't even require an account set up for potential investors unless they are selected for the IDO. This is good in that it streamlines the process for investors, but is also a strong show of confidence in the projects they help launch. Essentially, Coin Terminal doesn't truly benefit unless a launch is successful and investors see the value, coming back for more. This truly is a step in the right evolutionary direction, because it better aligns the project, the launchpad, the DEX, and the investor. READ SOURCE
