|
1:21 a.m. - 2004-04-07 Not a lot to say about today. My supervisor called mid-morning, just to touch base. He asked to revamp some of my resume. I had already said that was fine in writing. He knows what the contract entails and the client's values, so he's a better judge of what needs to be on there. He thought he might have more specifics for me by the end of the week and he said there was another contract he was working on too. Hmmmmm. It made me feel good to know he's feeling so upbeat about the progress he's made and that he's still thinking of me when those opportunities arise. Next up, my Dad and number three son came by today. They were doing a couple of runs to the dump with garbage from the business and had some space left on the truck on the last run. Anything to go? Yes a few extra pieces of furniture we don't need, since I was given the new-to-me bed. Frees up a little space - maybe I can move some of the election material downstairs now. From comments made in the media today it appears that the election might be pushed back to the fall. Lots of email and phone calls about election issues to respond to or act on. The most disturbing was that one of the political camps appears to be using Elections Canada's name when they call people, trying to recruit them to work for their team or trying to get information from electors about themselves. The caller who tipped me off was someone who is very credible, but they wouldn't give me any further detail - not even the political party's name. Now, dear diary, you can see why we try to find a contact for each party. I sent out a group e-mail detailing what I knew and requesting not only that whoever was doing the phoning desist from using ECs name, but also that they tell anyone whom they had talked with under false (fraudulent?) pretences be informed of the deception. I don't imagine they will follow through, but it might stop further calls. Frankly, I wouldn't vote for anyone who stole my personal information by lying about who they were, if I found out about it, but then each voter has their own criteria I guess. The problem often is that it is usually a small group of volunteers who go off the rails, without the knowledge of the candidate or the people managing the campaign. In cases like that, do you punish everyone for a few people's misbehaviour, and how do you tell for certain whether the behaviour was sanctioned or not. There have been a few times when I have been asked to be an observer of party nomination meetings, because of my elections background. One of the dirtiest tactics I've witnessed, next to character assassination, is for one side to salt one or more of their supporters in the other candidate's team. The plants or "ringers" then deliberately choose to do illegal or unethical things, making certain they are caught, usually by calling the media on themselves. It often doesn't matter what the rest of the compromised team say or do - they are all tarred with the same brush. It usually costs that candidate the nomination. See it isn't all details and databases, dear diary, sometimes mediating between competing factions can take up a lot of energy and time too. I let the head honchos in EC know what was happening and what I had done to address the problem. I haven't heard back so I guess they are satisfied with the status quo for now. � � |