<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>Hi, <br>
</p>
<p>This is my personal opinion, as all opinion I made over the last
days are mine alone and do not reflect the opinion of NPOC and its
members, although we all had a great discussion about all this in
NPOC.</p>
<p>I agree with Milton that it is time to think about about
solutions that will work for everybody involved. As I see it we
have to have the interest of those we represent first in mind. I
don't think we all served them particularly well over the last
days and weeks, so its time to make up. What I get from all this
is:</p>
<p>We need a much better and well thought out and formulated charter</p>
<p>We need to learn to treat each other with respect</p>
<p>We need to learn to forgive and forget</p>
<p>We need to learn to be better servants</p>
<p>(please add as needed)<br>
</p>
<p>Basically what I am asking for is a NCSG restart under a set of
previously agreed rules and if possible with a bunch of fresh new
faces without too much baggage.</p>
<p>Yours</p>
<p>Klaus<br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/23/2016 11:56 AM, Mueller, Milton
L wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:SN2PR0701MB733124F13DF1ABB3F006A2FA1EB0@SN2PR0701MB733.namprd07.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Now
we have a formal appeal of the EC “decision” to go ahead
with the election without fixing the ballot.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1W6xVs0M2vZkzGnYY543BJQ0SOIfD-5xZYYaTYzZg-ok/">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1W6xVs0M2vZkzGnYY543BJQ0SOIfD-5xZYYaTYzZg-ok/</a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Olevie
is correct (see below) that the NCSG EC needs to take some
responsibility now and resolve the conflict.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I
note that
</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F4E79;mso-style-textfill-fill-color:#1F4E79;mso-style-textfill-fill-alpha:100.0%">Arsène
has said that he is unaware of any formal decision from the
EC. I looked back at the records and he is correct, the EC
never made a decision. All we had was a unilateral statement
from Tapani that the discussion was “closed.” The problem
is, Tapani does not have the authority to unilaterally make
a decision for the EC. I see that both Robin and Monika, two
members of the EC, have signed the appeal letter, which
shows very clearly that there is no consensus within the EC
for Tapani’s approach to this problem.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F4E79;mso-style-textfill-fill-color:#1F4E79;mso-style-textfill-fill-alpha:100.0%"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F4E79;mso-style-textfill-fill-color:#1F4E79;mso-style-textfill-fill-alpha:100.0%">This
is a time and an issue where we need to achieve unity and
agreement. If the appeal is not resolved, the entire
election will be thrown out and we will have to have a vote
of the entire membership on the appeal. This will consume a
lot of time and energy. Please, EC members, Tapani, all of
you, take responsibility and attempt to come to a resolution
of this problem. You have to get ALL the EC members together
and you have to find an agreement that works for all of you.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Dr.
Milton L Mueller<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Professor,
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://spp.gatech.edu/"><span
style="color:#0563C1">School of Public Policy</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Georgia
Institute of Technology<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Internet
Governance Project
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://internetgovernance.org/"><span
style="color:#0563C1">http://internetgovernance.org/</span></a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
NCSG-Discuss [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Kouami<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, August 23, 2016 11:31 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: ballots - history<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p>Dear Tapani<br>
Thank you for sharing these concerns/issues with us.<br>
It's clear that something nées to be harmonized at this level.<br>
What are the others thinking ?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Le 23 août 2016 02:49, "Tapani Tarvainen"
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ncsg@tapani.tarvainen.info">ncsg@tapani.tarvainen.info</a>>
a écrit :<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Dear all,<br>
<br>
As I've been accused of abruptly changing claimed
long-established<br>
precedent in the treatment of NOTA, I looked at how it's been
done<br>
in past NCSG elections since 2011.<br>
<br>
The only case where I found the impact of NOTA explicitly
addressed<br>
by the Chair running the election was in 2011. Chair then was
Avri<br>
Doria and she put it like this:<br>
<br>
"In the case of the g-council vote, the decision is to pick
the top 4<br>
people. So if 'none of the above' comes in in any of the top 4
places,<br>
I suggest that it just gets skipped and the top 4 vote getters
become<br>
the g-council representative. It is just that those who got
fewer<br>
votes than none of the above, will have a clue about how hard
they<br>
will have to work in order to represent the membership."<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1110&L=ncsg-discuss&D=0&P=115980"
target="_blank">http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1110&L=ncsg-discuss&D=0&P=115980</a><br>
<br>
In 2012 the ballot, run by Robin, was organized differently:<br>
candidates were explicitly selected by region, with separate
NOTA for<br>
each. No explanation seems to have been offered as to what
NOTA means.<br>
(I can't now find the ballot in the web, only in my personal
mail<br>
archive.)<br>
<br>
In 2013 ballot was again run by Robin, this time with similar
style as<br>
today with a common pool of council candidates, but there was
no NOTA<br>
option at all.<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A3=ind1310&L=NCSG-DISCUSS&E=base64&P=1735682&B=--Apple-Mail%3D_BE8CECBD-76B4-4895-954A-1A242E2FEF7E&T=application%2Fpdf;%20name=%22NCSG%20Election%20results%20October%202013.pdf%22&N=NCSG%20Election%20results%20October%202013.pdf&XSS=3"
target="_blank">http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A3=ind1310&L=NCSG-DISCUSS&E=base64&P=1735682&B=--Apple-Mail%3D_BE8CECBD-76B4-4895-954A-1A242E2FEF7E&T=application%2Fpdf;%20name=%22NCSG%20Election%20results%20October%202013.pdf%22&N=NCSG%20Election%20results%20October%202013.pdf&XSS=3</a><br>
<br>
In 2014, run by Rafik, there was one common NOTA for all
council<br>
candidates, but no mention of it in the instructions.<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1409&L=ncsg-discuss&F=&S=&X=31BCBB9C87C143B93B&P=1055"
target="_blank">http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1409&L=ncsg-discuss&F=&S=&X=31BCBB9C87C143B93B&P=1055</a><br>
<br>
In 2015, again by Rafik, similar to 2014, except this time
NOTA was<br>
mentioned in his instructions - but without any explanation as
to how<br>
it would be treated, only stating that 'In each list (Chair,
GNSO<br>
councillors), you will also find the "none of the above"
option.'<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1509&L=ncsg-discuss&F=&S=&X=24E79EEDA4AE17FE9E&P=5880"
target="_blank">http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1509&L=ncsg-discuss&F=&S=&X=24E79EEDA4AE17FE9E&P=5880</a><br>
<br>
Absent explicit instructions to the contrary I took "None of
the Above"<br>
literally: that you don't want to vote any of the candidates
listed above.<br>
<br>
So, out of five past elections, in one it was explicitly
stated NOTA<br>
victory would not actually impact councillor election, in one
case<br>
there was no NOTA option, one was different enough from
current that<br>
it's not really useful as a precedent, and in the remaining
two<br>
there was no explanation of what a NOTA vote or NOTA victory
would mean.<br>
<br>
Given such variance in past practices I don't see the present
one<br>
as a radical departure from any established process.<br>
<br>
I do accept the chastisement of not having established the
process<br>
properly, however, and pledge to do so before the next
election,<br>
if I remain the Chair.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Tapani Tarvainen<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>