Hi,

I  do not think this needs a charter change. We need well formed
procedures created by our EC and vetted with the membership.  The
charter was written to allow for such procedures to be created.  In fact
that is one of the expected products of the EC.

For today we need to keep using the previous practice 

After the EC comes up with a proper procedure or we discuss changing
practice in the SG we can change what we do. Before then it is
undemocratic and a serious breech of process, which I find inexplicable.

avri


On 22-Aug-16 16:44, Klaus Stoll wrote:
> 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
>



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus