Election rules: Miscellany

[Stephanie Perrin]

Thanks Tapani, sorry I missed it.  I would like to join the group, will 
sign up.

cheers Steph


On 2017-08-01 09:22, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> Hi Stephanie,
>
> The issue of multiple voting is on that agenda, although perhaps in
> a bit wrong place: look at the last item under "(3) Voting process":
>
> "If an organization's representative is also an individual member,
>   can they vote in both roles?"
>
> I also raised the issue separately in election-reform list, cf.
>
> https://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/election-reform/2017-June/000021.html
>
> as I already reported in this list as well.
>
> As I also noted, NCSG EC discussed this last Friday and decided to
> continue on the subject after current elections.
>
> The more general issue of someone representing multiple organizations
> has never come up, but should obviously be resolved at the same time.
>
> I would like to invite you to join the election-reform list
> to participate in the discussion.
>
> Tapani
>
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 08:36:14AM -0400, Stephanie Perrin (stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca) wrote:
>> Hi Tapani, thanks for coming up with that list of rules.  There is no
>> mention of the multiple voting issue on the list, and this is one I find
>> particularly odd.  Many of us belong to numerous civil society or academic
>> networks and organizations.  Since it costs nothing to join NCSG, an
>> enterprising person could get his/her organization to join, and offer to be
>> the representative. That enterprising person could then vote multiple votes
>> for each organization represented, and as an individual as well???? Is there
>> no limit to how many ballots one person could control?  I could quite easily
>> cast a dozen votes then, depending on the size of the organizations I would
>> purport to represent.   I find this very odd indeed.  Obviously, we cannot
>> fix an issue like that in mid-election, but if you could point me to where
>> this issue has been discussed, I would like to catch up on the conversation,
>> and I would suggest it is something that needs to be fixed if it is as loose
>> as I have just described.
>>
>> Stephanie Perrin
>>
>>
>> On 2017-08-01 04:28, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> As those who have followed the election-reform list know, there were a
>>> number of issues regarding our elections that have never been properly
>>> resolved or at least not documented. Unfortunately we did not have
>>> enough time to work them all through - I have already posted
>>> separately about the most important ones that we did - so I'll just
>>> note briefly that the EC decided to leave the remaining issues to be
>>> worked out after current election, and do a quick ad hoc decision if
>>> some issue becomes acute.
>>>
>>> For reference, you can see a list of things so far identified here:
>>>
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/election-reform/2017-May/000002.html
>>>
>>> The list is unlikely to be complete, and if anybody has ideas of
>>> other things to be addressed, they'd be most welcome (either here
>>> or in election-reform list or even just email me to forward
>>> to election-reform list).
>>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20170801/e6105a95/attachment.htm>