Also praise for Tapani for doing the homework! But I am not praising his decision making process! I note that in 2012 we did it exactly the way we are asking to do it now. I still haven't heard a good reason why we can't fix the ballot. There can be delays and very severe problems for NCSG is this election is perceived as illegitimate and is challenged. --MM > -----Original Message----- > From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf > Of AbdulRasheed Tamton > Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 5:19 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [Marketing Mail] ballots - history > > Thank you Tapani for historically analyzing the NOTA for the last few years > and for others for bringing up the subject for the discussion; especially > Tatiana. Otherwise, the list members may have, mostly, ignored it. > > Since, NOTA is the bottommost candidate in the list (NOTA = none of the > above), please note that it is not that a silly process. > > NOTA was implemented in the last Indian Parliament Elections that select the > Prime Minister and the Indian government where more than 810 MILLION > voters participated in 2014. Majority of the voters were from the rural areas, > including the remotest villages. My point is that it is a well established > procedure that even applied and successfully tested for choosing one of the > major governments of the world. So, it has its position in the world of > elections. We could also use it with wisdom. > > > BR. > Rasheed Tamton. > > -----Original Message----- > From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf > Of Tapani Tarvainen > Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 10:47 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: [Marketing Mail] ballots - history > > Dear all, > > As I've been accused of abruptly changing claimed long-established > precedent in the treatment of NOTA, I looked at how it's been done in past > NCSG elections since 2011. > > The only case where I found the impact of NOTA explicitly addressed by the > Chair running the election was in 2011. Chair then was Avri Doria and she put > it like this: > > "In the case of the g-council vote, the decision is to pick the top 4 people. So > if 'none of the above' comes in in any of the top 4 places, I suggest that it just > gets skipped and the top 4 vote getters become the g-council > representative. It is just that those who got fewer votes than none of the > above, will have a clue about how hard they will have to work in order to > represent the membership." > > http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1110&L=ncsg- > discuss&D=0&P=115980 > > In 2012 the ballot, run by Robin, was organized differently: > candidates were explicitly selected by region, with separate NOTA for each. > No explanation seems to have been offered as to what NOTA means. > (I can't now find the ballot in the web, only in my personal mail > archive.) > > In 2013 ballot was again run by Robin, this time with similar style as today with > a common pool of council candidates, but there was no NOTA option at all. > > http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A3=ind1310&L=NCSG- > DISCUSS&E=base64&P=1735682&B=--Apple-Mail%3D_BE8CECBD-76B4-4895- > 954A- > 1A242E2FEF7E&T=application%2Fpdf;%20name=%22NCSG%20Election%20re > sults%20October%202013.pdf%22&N=NCSG%20Election%20results%20Octob > er%202013.pdf&XSS=3 > > In 2014, run by Rafik, there was one common NOTA for all council candidates, > but no mention of it in the instructions. > > http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1409&L=ncsg- > discuss&F=&S=&X=31BCBB9C87C143B93B&P=1055 > > In 2015, again by Rafik, similar to 2014, except this time NOTA was mentioned > in his instructions - but without any explanation as to how it would be > treated, only stating that 'In each list (Chair, GNSO councillors), you will also > find the "none of the above" option.' > > http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1509&L=ncsg- > discuss&F=&S=&X=24E79EEDA4AE17FE9E&P=5880 > > Absent explicit instructions to the contrary I took "None of the Above" > literally: that you don't want to vote any of the candidates listed above. > > So, out of five past elections, in one it was explicitly stated NOTA victory > would not actually impact councillor election, in one case there was no NOTA > option, one was different enough from current that it's not really useful as a > precedent, and in the remaining two there was no explanation of what a > NOTA vote or NOTA victory would mean. > > Given such variance in past practices I don't see the present one as a radical > departure from any established process. > > I do accept the chastisement of not having established the process properly, > however, and pledge to do so before the next election, if I remain the Chair. > > -- > Tapani Tarvainen > > The information in this email may contain confidential material and it is > intended solely for the addresses. Access to this email by anyone else is > unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the email > and destroy any copies of it, any disclosure, copying, distribution is prohibited > and may be considered unlawful. Contents of this email and any attachments > may be altered, Statement and opinions expressed in this email are those of > the sender, and do not necessarily reflect those of Saudi > Telecommunications Company (STC).