A fixable capacity screw-up was left sitting there long enough to decide what business lived and what business died at Green Party Conference Right, so the Green party has managed to turn an online conference tech crash into a question about what happened, what took so long to rectify it and as it turns out, who sat on the fix while conference time bled away. Green Party Spring Conference went online on 28 and 29 March, and much of the discussion surrounding it has been around the Zionism is Racism motion, and in part, this story may well relate to that still, but it’s not focus here because the tech faults on the day came first and foremost and an answer to those has not been particularly forthcoming. Conference is supposed to be the supreme forum of member decision-making, where we as Green party members make party policy, we do it, we vote on it, we bring motions, we as groups or individuals spend months working on them so issues like this that kill off what is already a limited space of time, three sessions on just a single day this time around, which was in my view ridiculous, Spring Conferences have been much longer in previous years, especially with the membership now the largest it has ever been. To little surprise the event sold out therefore, and then the voting system fell over right from the get go, on a day already carrying contentious business, the Zionism is Racism motion, so any suspect goings on were bound to be linked to that motion by some. The system did eventually get working again, but so much time on a day already too short, and with Conference ending with the Zionism is Racism motion getting introduced but getting no further than that, the tech issues and what was behind them, arguably could have been the difference. When voting finally got going, members have then voted against ruling that motion out of order, the first attempt to derail it. Members then voted to move the motion up the running order, which passed because we had the numbers. So the voting system machine for all of its false start, worked brilliantly when it got going. But that leaves a very awkward question sitting there in its place. If the system could be restored quickly enough to producing results – everything was fixed by the time we came back from a 10-15 minute break - who allowed the delay to become the story and the subsequent bottleneck to the democratic process?