[ALAC] Voting infrastructure rules

[Holly Raiche]

Hi Alan

I am happy with your suggested change, vix: replace 4 as you suggested.

Holly
On 31/01/2013, at 3:42 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:

> Currently we have in place a set of rules (approved by the ALAC in 
> June 2009) on how votes are to be conducted (that is votes that are 
> not in reference to named individuals).
> 
> Those rules are:
> 
> 1.  As the vote is proceeding, we can see how many people have voted.
> 2.  As the vote is proceeding, we can see who has voted.
> 3.  As the vote is proceeding, we can see a tally of how the votes 
> have been cast.
> 4.  When the vote is ended, we can see how each person has voted.
> 5.  The order of the options should not change as the vote proceeds.
> 6.  Outsiders who cannot vote can look at all of the above interim results.
> 
> Rule 4 was there because previously, we had on some occasions used a 
> BigPulse option to order the options so that the winning one was 
> first. The rules were debated and approved because at the time, we 
> seemd to used a semi-random set of voting parameters for each vote.
> 
> Based on the last few votes, we seem to be back at the state of 
> semi-random variations in each vote (the current ALS approval vote 
> does not allow a voter to see who has already voted, the recent votes 
> on ALAC statements on Thickwhois and IGO/INGO questions did allow 
> viewing the list of those who had voted).
> 
> Since we are in the process of cleaning up the overall ALAC rules, it 
> makes sense to revisit this one prior to having staff adjust 
> procedures to ensure that our rules are being met.
> 
> So I ask whether these are the rules we want or if changes need to be made.
> 
> I would suggest one change. Since these rules were created to have a 
> similar effect as a face-to-face vote with all parties and observers 
> in the same room, I would suggest the replacement of 4 with:
> 
> 4. As the vote is proceeding, we can see how voted have voted.
> 
> This was considered last time, but was not used due to a fear that 
> seeing how people vote could influence later votes. My thoughts are 
> that this is exactly what happens in a face-to-face vote and should 
> not change because we are voting electronically.
> 
> Does anyone have any thoughts on this. Specifically:
> 
> A) Should we keep the current rules?
> B) Should we replace 4. as suggested?
> C) Any other changes you believe we should make?
> 
> We regularly demand transparency of other parts of ICANN and 
> particularly the Board. I think that we should use the same standard 
> for ourselves.
> 
> Alan
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
> 
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)