<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [registrars] Motion to change Voting Ballots
- To: "Nikolaj Nyholm" <nikolajn@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [registrars] Motion to change Voting Ballots
- From: "Elana Broitman" <ebroitman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 15:12:19 -0400
- Cc: <registrars@xxxxxxxx>
- Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcNH2mISQoyvBy3ETJqntN4wtifaMQABeQIg
- Thread-topic: [registrars] Motion to change Voting Ballots
This is not yet a ballot, so can we take your email as an endorsement of
going from motion to ballot?
Thanks
-----Original Message-----
From: Nikolaj Nyholm [mailto:nikolajn@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 2:30 PM
To: Elana Broitman; registrars@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [registrars] Motion to change Voting Ballots
I am unsure whether we are endorsing a vote or a specific process.
Nonetheless, Ascio would like to endorse a vote, in particular favoring
process number 3.
/n
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elana Broitman [mailto:ebroitman@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 11. juli 2003 19:50
> To: registrars@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: [registrars] Motion to change Voting Ballots
>
>
> Explanation
>
> A number of registrars had expressed a wish for anonymous
> voting in order to protect Constituency members and
> potentially foster greater
> voter participation. The current voting process posts each
> Constituency
> member's vote as soon as such member votes. Please note that
> only Constituency
> members (who have passwords to the boardrooms site) may view
> voting results.
> At the Montreal meeting, we discussed several options for
> changing this process,
> including a change to post only the collective results rather
> than individual votes.
> On the list there was a question about whether or not
> abstentions may be viewed
> under one of the first 3 proposals. We will determine that
> fact prior to the vote.
>
> Motion
>
> Consequently, there is a motion for moving to one of the
> following processes:
>
> 1. Post only the collective voting results, not individual
> results, and only
> at the conclusion of the voting period.
>
> 2. Post only the collective voting results, not individual
> results, during
> the entire voting period.
>
> 3. Post individual voting results, but only at the conclusion
> of the voting
> period.
>
> 4. Continue to post individual voting results, during the
> entire voting
> period.
>
> Process
>
> Pursuant to the Constituency Rules of Procedure, this motion
> needs to have 5
> endorsements, and will be put to a vote under the current
> voting procedures
> after a 14-day discussion period. Friendly amendments will
> be accepted and
> such changes made to the ballot. Unfriendly amendments will
> receive a
> separate ballot.
>
> Additional Information
>
> In addition to making this change, there was discussion at
> the Montreal
> meeting about whether or not the Executive Committee should
> continue to
> manage the voting process. Apparently, the only way that it
> is possible to
> conduct votes through the boardrooms.org site is for the
> manager of the
> process (Ex.Com.) to have access to individual votes. While
> we do not intend
> to use such access, the Constituency may wish to delegate
> this task to a third
> party that is not a member of the Constituency. However, as
> that would entail
> delegation of all boardrooms.org management functions, including
> membership rolls, passwords, etc., it may be a broader change than
> anticipated, require hiring of a secretary, and/or switching
> to an alternative
> online service. We plan to investigate the options and bring
> them to the
> Constituency for consideration in short order. In the
> meantime, however, with
> important votes coming up for the Constituency, we did not
> want to hold up
> the consideration of a change in vote posting.
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|