+1

"...I hope we can get this fixed very quickly so it doesn't get 
forgotten. *Having NotA for each candidate in multi-seat races makes 
good sense*..."

I had hoped it would be fixed even for the present election, but a 
"consensus" in the EC did not favor this, considering and valuing "past 
procedures" over future broad acceptance of revised solutions.

Norbert

=


On 8/26/2016 1:15 AM, Dan Krimm wrote:
> Have not weighed-in here except signing on to the appeal (and now I 
> have cast my ballot).
>
> Let me just say this:
>
>  (1) EC made its decision: we will continue the current election under 
> the process given by the EC announcement: NotA is counted as a 
> "candidate" and can beat out other candidates to prevent them from 
> winning.
>
>  (2) The logic of NotA in a multi-seat race is clearly potentially 
> problematic in principle.  However my guess is that this will not in 
> fact come into play this election.  (NotA typically does not receive a 
> lot of votes in our past experience, and it is not likely that any of 
> the three candidates will be prevented from taking office by NotA this 
> time around.)
>
>  (3) I would support formal procedures to correct the logic problems 
> with NotA moving forward, and I hope we can get this fixed very 
> quickly so it doesn't get forgotten. *Having NotA for each candidate 
> in multi-seat races makes good sense* to me, though a few other 
> options could work as well.  But my instinct is to go for the most 
> minimal change in procedure compared to status quo that is sufficient 
> to make the logic work without unintended outcomes.  NotA for each 
> candidate in multi-seat races seems the most similar option, to me.
>
> Do we need to discuss much more here?  Let's try to simplify.  :-)
>
> Dan