<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">During the all
candidates meeting, I ventured to suggest that things were not
as bright and sunny as they appeared. Obviously, this fracas
over voting and transparency of council positions is
confirming my assessment of the situation. I am disappointed
in a number of things, process is only one. I cannot see
why, on day one of the election, the EC of NCSG (or the Chair,
who is also running for election) is refusing to comply with a
rather simple request. What is everyone afraid of in changing
the ballot? As someone applying to serve for two more years,
I think blocking a request for changing the ballot does much
to promote distrust. Surely, as Klaus has said, we have a lot
of important work to do. However, trust, accountability, and
making this electoral process as useful as it can be is worth
reissuing a ballot in my view. Dredging up procedural reasons
not to, given how we have relied on informal mechanisms and
email discussion of process (rather than changing the Charter
and Bylaws) strikes me as a waste of time, except insofar as
it illuminates the Charter work we need to do.</font></font></p>
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">However, it is
certainly helping with engagement, and given Neal's expertise
in voting and elections perhaps he will volunteer with helping
in redrafting these documents after the election!</font></font></p>
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">Regards, <br>
</font></font></p>
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">Stephanie Perrin </font></font><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2016-08-22 14:01, Neal McBurnett
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:20160822180125.GN3940@feynman" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">To start with, I'm disappointed in the process here. I urge people to clearly cite and quote charter requirements, previous precedent on the meaning of NOTA, etc etc.
I'm looking at what Google suggests is our Charter:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/ncsg-charter-05may11-en.pdf">http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/ncsg-charter-05may11-en.pdf</a>
Is that the correct up-to-date document?
Parenthetically, I must say I'm having a hard time copy-pasting from it. Spaces show up as "!" when copying from Google's PDF viewer, and dashes as "%". And using evince, I get a control-M character interspersed between each word.
Recently, (Aug 22, 2016 at 05:22:56PM +0000) Mueller, Milton L wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Actually it looks as if the EC never formally approved the ballot, which is a clear violation of the charter.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Milton, can you clarify what language in the Charter that violates?
I don't yet know what I think of the NOTA option for a multi-winner election. I can't find any other clear examples of this sort of rule being used, but I don't know the background for all the countries and elections noted in Wikipedia:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/None_of_the_above">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/None_of_the_above</a>
I'll say that the charter has some pretty bad language around elections, viewed in retrospect via this issue. E.g. it seems to suggest that the only valid way to mark a ballot is to vote for exactly 3 candidates in this case. I don't know if "NOTA" would pass muster as being a candidate, especially if it can't win.
4.3 Election for NCSG GNSO Council Representatives (size, number, and distribution of votes):
In the discussion below, N refers to the number of seats that need to be elected.
Optimally N will equal 3 seats in years with normal rotation. Any number of reasons can cause this number to vary.
• NCSG members classified as “individuals” will be given N votes and must assign 1 vote to each of N candidates.
• NCSG members classified as “small organizations” will be given 2N votes and must assign exactly 2 votes to each of N candidates.
• NCSG members classified as “large organizations” will be given 4N votes and must assign exactly 4 votes to each of N candidates.
Will we really throw out ballots that only mark two candidates?
I see this text there, to support the "15-member" rule that has been cited:
2.4.2.1 Appeals of NCSG-EC decisions
1. Any decision of the NCSG-EC can be appealed by requesting a full vote of the NCSG membership. There are several ways in which an appeal can be initiated:
• If 15 NCSG members, consisting of both organizational and individual members, request such an appeal the NCSG Executive Committee will first take the appeal under consideration.
• If, after consideration of any documentation provided by those making the appeal, the NCSG-EC does not reverse its decision, the NCSG-EC and those making the appeal should attempt to negotiate a mutually agreeable solution.
• If the NCSG-EC and those making the appeal cannot reach a mutually acceptable agreement on the decision within 30 days, then an NCSG vote will be scheduled as soon as practicable.
• For this type of appeal to succeed 60% of all of the NCSG members must approve of the appeal in a full membership vote as defined in section 4.0.
Looking forward to more clarity here....
Neal McBurnett <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://neal.mcburnett.org/">http://neal.mcburnett.org/</a>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I understand the tendency to "let the chair do all the work" but there is a reason we wrote the charter to require EC approval of ballots.
We had some prior controversies and wanted multiple eyes looking at the ballot before it was sent out.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">-----Original Message-----
I object to the EC and the Chair changing practice without a specific discussion
among the members to do so. This was sprung on us and then declared a
done deal by executive decision. I wish to challenge that executive decision.
Elections are among the most important things we do.
avri
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>