+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