Dear all,

Good arguments have been made about how NOTA should be treated and how
it should have been presented in the ballot.

But the text of the ballot is clear, and after the election is already
under way, it cannot be changed or explained or reinterpreted to mean
anything but what it explicitly says.

So the rules are simple:

If you want to vote for any candidates for council you cannot
simultaneously vote for NOTA. If you do, your ballot will be
considered invalid.

Likewise, you cannot both vote for a Chair candidate
and NOTA for Chair at the same time.

So: if you have already voted and marked both NOTA and some
candidates, please vote again lest your ballot be considered invalid.

There's nothing in the charter that precludes this, even if other,
arguably better alternatives exist. But we cannot change rules when
the election has already began.

As for what voting NOTA would mean: absent anything in the charter
or any predetermined rule, it can only mean same as abstaining,
in the sense that it would not affect the election outcome.

NOTA votes would be counted and counts published, just like
blank votes are counted separately from invalid votes in
many national elections, nothing more.

Anything else would be changing the rules mid-election,
and we can't do that.

I agree that the procedure could be better and it definitely should
have been made clear in advance. It should also have been explicitly
codified by the EC, and I will take it upon myself to do that before
next election.

But now, let's vote.

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen