I am really trying to understand what you disagree with for the current ballot, let me quote a section of your previous mail which actually informed my previous response (less the publicity part).

Avri wrote:
"Yes, i think the matter of elections is important enough to do that if a
new ballot is not issued that clarifies the situation in such a way that
allows people to vote against any candidate they wish to vote against.
The old style NOTA worked, but if that is not clear enough after 5 years
of doing it, then come up with something that is clear."

My question:
1. How does the current ballot not allow people to vote against candidates?

Permit me to also quote a section of Amir's recent mail:
"This year, there is a suggestion to change how NOTA is being used, but it hasn’t been approved by the EC (via full consensus as required)."

5. Is there any reason to believe that the "new style" that is still under discussion has been implemented on the current ballot? If yes, how?

Regards
PS: I think EC normally discuss issues on their list and then react to them on the NCSG list which could make members to be lost as they have no clear picture and perspective.

On 22 Aug 2016 22:43, "avri doria" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

On 22-Aug-16 15:25, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
> FWIW, if the goal of this thread is to give the NCSG some publicity, I
> will say yes, the goal has been achieved ;-)

That was not my goal.

My goal is an election run in accordance with the charter and consistent
with current practice that has not been superseded by formal procedure.
I strongly object to changing established practice unilaterally without
discussion or the definition of formal procedures.

But yes, such smiley 'publicity' comes of transparent discussion.
Wish it were so for all constituencies, stakeholder groups, SOAC and the
Board

avri

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus