Sender: |
|
X-To: |
|
Date: |
Mon, 22 Aug 2016 16:44:53 -0400 |
Reply-To: |
|
Message-ID: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
quoted-printable |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Dear Amr
I thought I explained this several times today and did not want to
repeat myself. I am not against the use of nota, I am against the use of
nota in order to prevent a candidate that is on the ballot. I can feel
your pain but as long as we keep having this kind of discussions like
today, people will think twice if they put themselves up as a candidate.
What we need is fundamental charter changes and fundamental changes in
our culture of working together.
Klaus
On 8/22/2016 4:37 PM, Amr Elsadr wrote:
> Hi Klaus,
>
> You still haven’t pointed me towards any text in the charter that prohibits the use of NOTA. :)
>
> And also:
>
>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 10:17 PM, Klaus Stoll <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Amr
>>
>> Thanks for your comments. My thoughts are:
>>
>> We need to go religiously by the charter and what the NCSG-EC does.
> My point is that I believe that this has been done using NOTA over the past few years. In fact, I believe that the changes being suggested now conflict with the charter, because the EC hasn’t approved the procedures being introduced during this election cycle. I do not believe that it is right or in the best interest of the NCSG for us to wait until after the elections to challenge this.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Amr
|
|
|