Hello Avri,
FWIW, if the goal of this thread is to give the NCSG some publicity, I will
say yes, the goal has been achieved ;-). Otherwise the following seem to be
clear with the current ballot:
1. If you don't want the Chair to be elected, you can select "non of the
above" option.
2. If you don't want any of the three councillors, you can select "none of
the above" (which is a good thing as it signifies a definite response)
3. If you want just two of the three candidates then you can still just
select the two leaving the person you don't want unselected. (ref: from the
instructions: Select *at most three* of the following candidates...)
I have no idea why some here feel it's not possible to vote against a
candidate using the current ballot structure. There will however be a valid
case if someone can confirm that he/she selected less than three(for the
counselors section) and could not submit the ballot.
Regards
Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On 22 Aug 2016 20:13, "avri doria" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Yes, i think the matter of elections is important enough to do that if a
> new ballot is not issued that clarifies the situation in such a way that
> allows people to vote against any candidate they wish to vote against.
> The old style NOTA worked, but if that is not clear enough after 5 years
> of doing it, then come up with something that is clear.
>
> We are not voting on a slate. We are voting for individual candidates
> and people may have reasons for not voting for a particular candidate.
>
> If you cannot see your way clear to understanding NOTA as it has been
> used in NCSG in the past, then give us the option to vote against each
> candidate on a line by line basis.
>
> Voting should not be merely symbolic. It is unfortunate we don't have
> enough qualified people willing to run so we have a real choice. We
> should, however, still have some choice.
>
>
> avri
>
>
>
> On 22-Aug-16 13:04, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 12:59:11PM -0400, avri doria ([log in to unmask])
> wrote:
> >
> >> We are also free to challenge any decision the EC makes with 15 member
> >> signatures.
> > Yes. And override the EC with a vote, with 60% threshold.
> >
> > If you think this merits that, you can certainly do so.
> >
> > --
> > Tapani Tarvainen
> >
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
|
