Sender: |
|
Date: |
Mon, 22 Aug 2016 19:54:11 +0300 |
Content-Disposition: |
inline |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Message-ID: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 12:43:41PM -0400, avri doria ([log in to unmask]) wrote:
> On 22-Aug-16 12:33, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> > I do see some people want to be able to cast negative votes so to
> > speak and think NOTA is the way it could be done, but I don't agree
> > with that.
>
> That is the way it has been done until now.
It has? I don't think NOTA has ever won, so there's no real precedent,
nor am I aware of any documented decision to that effect either.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
> > But we're presently discussing this in NCSG EC and if it decides
> > that new ballots need to be issued, we will do that.
>
> As long as the NCSG body politic agrees, that is.
"The NCSG body politic" is no decision-making body. Nor is this list.
Appealing to the membership at large can only be formally done by
a vote. Perhaps we vote on how the election is done. :-)
Given the timing, I suggest an easy way to do it:
Everybody: if you think I'm in the wrong here, vote NotA for Chair.
If I lose to NotA I will accept my defeat and call for a new election.
You are of course also welcome to challenge the election in any
other way as well, if you so choose.
--
Tapani Tarvainen
|
|
|