Hi Neal,

In case you’re still trying to find it, the current NCSG charter is located here: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Charter

Thanks.

Amr

> On Aug 22, 2016, at 8:01 PM, Neal McBurnett <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> To start with, I'm disappointed in the process here.  I urge people to clearly cite and quote charter requirements, previous precedent on the meaning of NOTA, etc etc.
> 
> I'm looking at what Google suggests is our Charter:
> 
>  http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/ncsg-charter-05may11-en.pdf
> 
> Is that the correct up-to-date document?
> 
> Parenthetically, I must say I'm having a hard time copy-pasting from it.  Spaces show up as "!" when copying from Google's PDF viewer, and dashes as "%".  And using evince, I get a control-M character interspersed between each word.
> 
> Recently, (Aug 22, 2016 at 05:22:56PM +0000) Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>> Actually it looks as if the EC never formally approved the ballot, which is a clear violation of the charter.
> 
> Milton, can you clarify what language in the Charter that violates?
> 
> I don't yet know what I think of the NOTA option for a multi-winner election.  I can't find any other clear examples of this sort of rule being used, but I don't know the background for all the countries and elections noted in Wikipedia:
> 
>  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/None_of_the_above
> 
> I'll say that the charter has some pretty bad language around elections, viewed in retrospect via this issue.  E.g. it seems to suggest that the only valid way to mark a ballot is to vote for exactly 3 candidates in this case.  I don't know if "NOTA" would pass muster as being a candidate, especially if it can't win.
> 
> 4.3 Election for NCSG GNSO Council Representatives (size, number, and distribution of votes):
> In the discussion below, N refers to the number of seats that need to be elected. 
> Optimally N will equal 3 seats in years with normal rotation. Any number of reasons can cause this number to vary.
> • NCSG members classified as “individuals” will be given N votes and must assign 1 vote to each of N candidates.
> • NCSG members classified as “small organizations” will be given 2N votes and must assign exactly 2 votes to each of N candidates.
> • NCSG members classified as “large organizations” will be given 4N votes and must assign exactly 4 votes to each of N candidates.
> 
> Will we really throw out ballots that only mark two candidates?
> 
> I see this text there, to support the "15-member" rule that has been cited:
> 
> 2.4.2.1 Appeals of NCSG-EC decisions
> 1. Any decision of the NCSG-EC can be appealed by requesting a full vote of the NCSG membership. There are several ways in which an appeal can be initiated:
> • If 15 NCSG members, consisting of both organizational and individual members, request such an appeal the NCSG Executive Committee will first take the appeal under consideration.
> • If, after consideration of any documentation provided by those making the appeal, the NCSG-EC does not reverse its decision, the NCSG-EC and those making the appeal should attempt to negotiate a mutually agreeable solution.
> • If the NCSG-EC and those making the appeal cannot reach a mutually acceptable agreement on the decision within 30 days, then an NCSG vote will be scheduled as soon as practicable.
> • For this type of appeal to succeed 60% of all of the NCSG members must approve of the appeal in a full membership vote as defined in section 4.0.
> 
> Looking forward to more clarity here....
> 
> Neal McBurnett                 http://neal.mcburnett.org/
> 
>> I understand the tendency to "let the chair do all the work" but there is a reason we wrote the charter to require EC approval of ballots. 
>> We had some prior controversies and wanted multiple eyes looking at the ballot before it was sent out.
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> 
>>> 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