Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos

On 5 Sep 2016 10:52 p.m., "Mueller, Milton L" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
>
> Apparently, from the totals Tapani received, 349 total votes were cast. (299 for, 50 against). Now look at the totals for the Council candidates. None of them come anywhere close to 349.
>

SO: Seriously Milton? You mean over 300 (272 + 37) is not close to 349 OR looking at votes casted, you mean 200+ is not close to 299 (which is that of Chair).

> What this means is that many people did not vote for specific Council candidates.
>

SO: People win elections with less than 10 votes, its still a win.

> The problem with this is that we don't know how to interpret those votes. Does it mean that they don't want these candidates elected, but forgot to tick NOTA? Or does it mean that they don't really support the candidate, but were swayed by Tapani's pressure against voting for NOTA? Or does it mean they were just confused when they were filling out the ballot?
>

SO: I guess the point is that no matter the combination we do in this case, the three candidates beats the NOTA.

> Just to give you a sense of how much this matter, look at what happens if we consider the absence of a vote FOR a Council candidate to be the same as a vote for NOTA:
>
> Tapani: 299 for, 50 against = total 349
> Rafik:  272 for, 77 against = total 349
> Steph:  257 for, 92 against = total 349
> Ed:     214 for, 135 against = total 349
>

SO: The above still obviously indicate a win for the three candidates. I hope you are not suggesting that a candidate should be declared not elected for getting 135 against (for instance) even though he/she got 214 for. I am not very much engaged in NCSG processes but will be amazed if that indeed happen.

> So in future, we must ensure that votes are distinct, unambiguous choices
>
SO: +1 to this but we should stop speculating the election that just got concluded would have swayed differently. I for one feel the traffic on NOTA and all the discussion about the counselors election reduced the votes of each candidates but hey those are yet another speculation so I will suggest we congratulate the new team and move on while ensuring to fix the ballot in future. I for one like the simple suggestion made by Avri; stick NOTA to each candidate and be done with.

Regards
>
>
>