I'm sorry to hijack your thread, Tatiana, but the others have so many replies that it is hard to know where to respond — and I agree with your sentiments. So forgive me, please, for responding here, but not actually responding to your message.

In my view it is essential that we have the ability to vote for None of the Above (NOTA) for each individual candidate, should we wish to do so. The absence of such a NOTA option may otherwise lead to misinterpretations of the outcome of the election. Some candidates may infer from vote totals that they are popular or have a democratic mandate.

Yet if our voters cast a vote simply because they respect the electoral process (or must vote; NCUC travel support, for instance, is contingent on having voted in the preceding NCUC election), then such an inference would be incorrect.

A NOTA vote is a vote against the choices on offer. It implies that the voter consents to the legitimacy of the electoral process, is willing to bear the costs of electoral participation, and is prepared to use this to communicate his or her displeasure with the candidate(s) presented.

Certainly, I would hope that any candidate who receives less votes than NOTA does would take this to be an informative signal from the voters that they lack support.

Warm wishes,


Ayden Férdeline
[linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: On ballots, NOTA and "symbolic elections"
Local Time: August 22, 2016 9:22 PM
UTC Time: August 22, 2016 8:22 PM
From: [log in to unmask]
To: [log in to unmask]


Hi all,


I decided not to write in the long thread of messages related to the current situation with the ballot.

What makes me really astounded is the broader context of this discussion. While many members of this stakeholder group are fighting for transparency, accountability and fair processes in different working group at the ICANN, it strikes me what kind of comments about democracy I see here on the list from the NCSG leadership. "Symbolic elections"? Where all the legitimacy and fairness of the processes have gone? How I personally can define the set values of this stakeholder group, the values I (and many others) am supposed to stand for?
I agree with Dave, who pointed out that even the notion of "symbolic" election is a bad idea. And no, it's not about not having enough people running for the seats. It's about not being able to vote against any of them.

I am not talking about this particular elections - I wish all our candidates good luck and hope they won't get NOTA votes. I am talking about the broader context, about the comments I have never thought I will see on the list of the group that is supposed to stand for fairness and due processes.

And this is all very sad.

Warm regards
Tanya