Occam's Razor applied to itSMF USA election saga

Readers who are familiar with Occam's Razor may like to apply the principle to itSMF's recent theory as to the source of the USA Board election fraud.

itSMF USA's Theory: a group of "a few" people risked prosecution in order to "embarass and undermine" itSMF USA. Presumably anyone who wants to embarass and undermine itSMF USA is acting from outside? That group somehow gained access to an itSMF USA system and copied a list of "the names, street and e-mail addresses, and employer names of the group's members". They then fraudulently voted on behalf of a small number of those names with the intent of that criminal activity becoming public knowledge but betting that the inevitable investigation would not uncover them. They then announced the fraud: to take such a risk they must have been supremely confident that the consequences would undermine itSMF USA to such an extent as to bring about an outcome that benefited them enough to justify the risk, though there is no suggestion as to what that outcome might be. Since that time the group has maintained their unity and silence despite investigation by Kroll and rumours of the DoJ sniffing around too.

An alternate hypothesis apparenty not accepted by itSMF: somebody inside itSMF USA used their access to membership data to fraudulently vote, thinking it would not be uncovered, in order to advance their own career or that of a close associate.

What's your pick?


itsmf voting fraud

Not since the sixties have I seen so much playing twister. The entire premise of this comment is absurd. Someone was risking prosecution? Bull pasture nuggets! The people who did this did it their own reasons. In my experience some people create messes and others exploit messes. This is clearly the case here. Why are we wasting the storage space on this non-event. Let's get on with the movement and start sharing information that will pursue the vision of IT service management. Whoever is writing this stuff needs to get a life.

Because we have a wolf in the chicken house

Its important because it goes to the very ethical heart of those who represent us at the Board level. Someone who is now sitting on the USA Board is claimed to have commissioned a third-party to cast votes to guarantee a seat. They are still there and may run for higher office. You are correct, whoever did this, did it for PERSONAL GAIN. It is not a non-event. Wake up - there is a wolf in the henhouse..... Are you telling us all you don't care is someone screws with an election process for personal gain - or perhaps you are more closely involved than you might wish to disclose.... I for one smell smoke...

Syndicate content