Klaus,

I disagree with your position.

Yes the EC was supposed to create procedure to amplify the content in
the charter.  they didn't.

In the meantime there are 5 years of practice to go on.  If the EC of
the Chair want to change that practice, come up with a new one.  Don't
just willy nilly change things around.

I do not think this is a position for the ombuds yet, but am fine with
bringing him in.  We have a charter that says that is 15 members object
to EC decisions or actions we can call a vote on that.  It seems like it
is time to put that clause into effect.

I object to the EC and the Chair changing practice without a specific
discussion among the members to do so.  This was sprung on us and then
declared a done deal by executive decision.  I wish to challenge that
executive decision. Elections are among the most important things we do.

avri


On 22-Aug-16 13:08, Klaus Stoll wrote:
> Dear Avri
>
> Please help me to understand
>
>
> On 8/22/2016 12:43 PM, avri doria 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.
>>
>> If you or the EC had wanted to change that, you should have discussed
>> with it the membership instead of just doing it.
> Is it not a question of what is in the charter or not and not a
> question of what has been done. If it is not in the charter it has no
> effect on the election outcome,
>>
>>> 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.
> How do we decide on what the NCSG body politics agrees? What is the
> process?. Votes?. I want to avoid that those who scream loudest are
> seen as the majority.
>>
>> At this point getting a sufficient group together to challenge an EC
>> decision seems quite possible.
> It is possible, but does it make sense to start a war every time
> someone does not agree with us.? As far as I can see the NPOC position
> is clearly expressed and stated.
>> If it is not changed to the prior understanding for all elections in the
>> NCSG to date, I will recommend a challenge.
> Again, understandings can not replace a charter. We have to obey to
> some minimum standards of following the rules.
>
> Challenge away, this seems to be a case for the Ombudsman. Must be
> some kind of record after just one day of voting.
>
> I wish we could put our energies into more constructive issues.
>
> Klaus
>
>
>
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>> .
>>
>



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