MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6991199226

Feb 23 2025- Susan Auch Says PC's Rigged Transcona Nomination

2025· other· en· W6991199226 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternet Archive (Internet Archive) · 2025
Typeother
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueEducation and Cultural Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésNominationEconomic JusticeSign (mathematics)Order (exchange)Adversarial system
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Allegations of arbitrary rules and deadlines were leveled at the Manitoba Progressive Conservatives this weekend by Susan Auch, who wanted to run for the provincial nomination in Transcona. In Episode 9, Auch tells her version of how she was treated, and why she thinks party insiders manipulated the process to keep her out and smooth the way for former City councilor Shawn Nason. Raised in Transcona, Susan Auch became a 3-time Olympic skating medalist inducted into numerous athletic halls of fame. A realtor, she had an unsuccessful run for the Tories in 2011 in Assiniboia, so she's not a newcomer to party politics. 3.30 - When she heard a byelection was called for March 18th to replace the late MLA Nello Altomare, Auch felt "Transcona's my neighborhood and I wanted to run... I called headquarters and initially the CEO was very excited... she called me back and she was quite cool." Auch explains the odd restrictions placed on her, ranging from a 30 hour time limit, to being denied a membership list while told the nomination paper signatures had to be from current members only. She raises a good point- why would she be told not to sign up new members, when the party is in the midst of a leadership race? Auch says she spoke to one of those hopefuls, Obby Khan. 7.00 - Marty Gold explains the court precedent set in the 1980's when Tory stalwarts Tom Denton and Olga Fuga tried to withhold member lists to control a non-profit board and Justice Scollin scolded them. 10.10- Auch's statement was "certain insiders saw me as a threat." She answers questions about her comment. Also discussed- Nason certainly isn't afraid to compete for the nomination; former PC leader Hugh McFadyen and her run in 2011; skewed rumours about Auch's civil court cases; "in Manitoba courts, people can lie". 18.15 - "The question we should ask is why would we not want the constituency to decide on who should be their representative?" Hear Auch's remarks about her disappointment in how the 2011 PC campaign treated her and the need to shore up current leadership. "I'm a business person and I'm a leader. Why would you not want me to have a chance and compete?... we need this party to be strong and have a lot of leaders." 27.30 Part 2 - Marty provides his overview of the nomination situation in Transcona, and how it can impact voter perceptions. ***** Today in the Winnipeg Sun- "T he City claimed it would take 10 extra hours beyond the allotted 2 hour FIPPA limit, and demanded he pay $300 for the reports to be located. "So I asked to see it. A city spokesman responded, \"Engineering reports are not public domain but can be requested through the FIPPA process.\" "And I was told it's not an actual policy. \"There is no specific directive regarding technical reports being or not being appended to administrative reports. It isjust our best practice to not publish technical or engineering reports in their raw state. We instead summarize the technical reports within the administrative report, which was done in this case.\" "Best practice? To keep taxpayers in the dark, maybe. " And guess who wants the bridge? The Bike Lobby. Read it here: City keeps report justifying $5M Omand's Creek mega bridge secret **** Our interviews, investigations and analysis is fueled by the direct financial support of listeners and readers who believe in our mission- You have the power and the right to know what's really going on in your community. We cover crime, public safety, government waste and neighborhood issues with insight and knowledge gathered over decades of being Your Watchdog. Support for the costs of Season 6 can be sent via PayPal or E-transfer at the links on our Donate page - where the top podcasts and more are listed for your review. WE EARN YOUR SUPPORT.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: Autre
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,249
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0310,003

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,022
Tête enseignante GPT0,305
Écart entre enseignants0,283 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle