Congratulations, Spencer and Rhys, who I’m told won by a margin of more than 300 votes.
Commiserations to Briony and Greg, who came in second â€“ admirable achievement given the obstacles facing them as relative newcomers.
And to Charlotte and Freddy, and Fernando and Nighthawk, who came third and fourth respectively.
All runners-up are invited to write here on SH1. The pay isn’t good, but at least the readership is almost non-existent.
Here is a song that captures the moment.
It doesn’t seem like a year since I posted about the Craccum election a year ago, but it is exactly a year since I posted that post a year ago.
The results are in, sort of, and the winner of the Craccum Editor election is Dan Sloan, who will be going into his second (non-consecutive) year as editor. Continue reading
It’s Craccum election time again, poor bastards. Usually it’s either a one- or two-horse race, with fairly obvious people from the incumbent editors’ team running against someone hoping to interrupt the dynasty.
This time it’s a bit more interesting, and it’s really something I’ve been waiting to watch for four years. There are four teams running for Craccum Editor ’10, and every single one of them has a real chance.
Elections are an interesting way to pick editors of Craccum. The most common criticism and most common praise of the system are the same: anyone can win. Another criticism is that being able to run a successful campaign does not demonstrate the ability to produce a successful magazine, but I disagree. The role of editor is not to write well, as many often think, but rather to inspire a group of volunteers to consistently contribute publishable content throughout an entire year. Elections can’t be won alone. They need a team, and the better the candidate is at collecting and inspiring that team, the better chance they have at winning elections. And so the elections tend to favour the people who will make good editors.