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