Hi

It would seem that the interaction of NOTA and (un)clicks needs a definitive, precedent-related ruling before people proceed with voting.  Having NOTA for all three candidates as a group seems to open up uncertainty.  By way of comparison, the NCUC ballots always have an [] Abstain option for each slot, which in an uncontested election means a candidate obviously can come up short.

The issue that Matt raises about the lack of a numerical threshold for a vote to be valid also seems to merit reflection.  Below what level would we consider someone to not have a proper mandate?

Neither the NCSG charter nor the NCUC bylaws deals in much detail with ballot mechanics (I don’t know about NPOC’s).  Perhaps these things should be taken up in the respective revisions.

Bill 


> On Aug 22, 2016, at 15:10, Tatiana Tropina <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Avri and all,
> 
> 
> The way I always thought NOTA worked in a ranking election as we have
> for council, is that if someone picked NOTA instead of one candidate,
> they were saying they preferred no one to that person.
>  
> I somehow gathered something different from this thread. As far as I understood, NOTA will mean that I am voting against all of the three candidates, even if I ticked, say, two of them. Would be much better if things work as you describe. 
> I am really curious now.  
> Warm regards
> Tanya