Hi,

Maybe someone from the exec committee can explain what (if anything) was
wrong with the text as here:
http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/ec-ncsg/2016-August/001133.html

Thanks,
Tamir

On 8/27/2016 6:42 PM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>
> I read some of these messages and I am unable to understand what is
> going on in EC.
>
> I was especially disturbed about this message from Joan Kerr:
>
> Â 
>
> This is a great time to take a break and review the agreement we had
> on the
>
> call.  Perhaps then after reflection, we can address the response
> directly
>
> and concisely.
>
> Â 
>
> I am sorry, but I don’t see this as a great time to “take a
> break.” I, and I think most of the SG, think this is the time to
> finish what you started, and to realize that the SG’s unity and the
> legitimacy and respect of the EC will be eroded if you don’t.
>
> Â 
>
> The EC needs to issue a statement settling the appeal immediately. The
> essence of the agreement was already conveyed to the NCSG by Tapani. I
> cannot understand why the EC is dithering over this.
>
> Â 
>
> --MM
>
> Â 
>
> *From:*NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf
> Of *Tatiana Tropina
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 27, 2016 6:27 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* EC response to the By Laws Section 2.4.2.1 Appeal on the
> election process
>
> Â 
>
> Dear all,
>
> Â 
>
> Last week EC seemed to quickly resolve the Appeal on the election
> process, that challenged the interpretation of NOTA votes. As far as I
> remember, those who signed the appeal were told that they would get a
> timely response from the EC which would seal this deal. 
>
> Â 
>
> However, up to now I have not seen anything coming from the EC on the
> list on this matter. I checked the public archives, and I see that EC
> is still debating how to word it's compromise. It worries me a bit
> because world is moving on and we're going ahead with this election.
> When I read the emails on the public NCSG EC thread, I really wonder
> what's going on and whether EC is trying to, pardon me for the lame
> pun attempt, to compromise the compromise.
>
> Â 
>
> As far as I understand, yesterday EC almost agreed on sending the
> response:
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/ec-ncsg/2016-August/001133.html
>
> Â 
>
> However, today the temperature changed and I see that the text is
> still debated and, frankly speaking, it does look like what we agreed
> upon is still considered as not being agreed:
>
> Â 
>
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/ec-ncsg/2016-August/001134.html
>
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/ec-ncsg/2016-August/001140.html
>
> Â 
>
> I know that it's weekend, but since I see that EC has been debating
> the things today, may I kindly ask anyone from the EC update us on
> what is actually happing with the EC response to the appeal? I believe
> those who signed the appeal didn't submit it with the intent to wait
> till the end of elections, when it will be too late.
>
> Â 
>
> Thanks a lot!
>
> Warm regards
>
> Â 
>
> Tatiana 
>
> Â 
>