Klaus, I disagree with your position. Yes the EC was supposed to create procedure to amplify the content in the charter. they didn't. In the meantime there are 5 years of practice to go on. If the EC of the Chair want to change that practice, come up with a new one. Don't just willy nilly change things around. I do not think this is a position for the ombuds yet, but am fine with bringing him in. We have a charter that says that is 15 members object to EC decisions or actions we can call a vote on that. It seems like it is time to put that clause into effect. 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 On 22-Aug-16 13:08, Klaus Stoll wrote: > Dear Avri > > Please help me to understand > > > On 8/22/2016 12:43 PM, avri doria wrote: >> On 22-Aug-16 12:33, Tapani Tarvainen wrote: >>> I do see some people want to be able to cast negative votes so to >>> speak and think NOTA is the way it could be done, but I don't agree >>> with that. >> That is the way it has been done until now. >> >> If you or the EC had wanted to change that, you should have discussed >> with it the membership instead of just doing it. > Is it not a question of what is in the charter or not and not a > question of what has been done. If it is not in the charter it has no > effect on the election outcome, >> >>> But we're presently discussing this in NCSG EC and if it decides >>> that new ballots need to be issued, we will do that. >> As long as the NCSG body politic agrees, that is. > How do we decide on what the NCSG body politics agrees? What is the > process?. Votes?. I want to avoid that those who scream loudest are > seen as the majority. >> >> At this point getting a sufficient group together to challenge an EC >> decision seems quite possible. > It is possible, but does it make sense to start a war every time > someone does not agree with us.? As far as I can see the NPOC position > is clearly expressed and stated. >> If it is not changed to the prior understanding for all elections in the >> NCSG to date, I will recommend a challenge. > Again, understandings can not replace a charter. We have to obey to > some minimum standards of following the rules. > > Challenge away, this seems to be a case for the Ombudsman. Must be > some kind of record after just one day of voting. > > I wish we could put our energies into more constructive issues. > > Klaus > > > >> >> avri >> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> . >> > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus