[ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes

Evan Leibovitch evan at telly.org
Fri Oct 3 19:27:42 UTC 2014

On 3 October 2014 14:59, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:

> I have to question how much refinement we should be putting into something
> that so far, has happened perhaps once every year or two or three and to
> the best of my recollection has only been challenged once in our history.
> Personally, I can readily accept 1 or 3.  Which I have a preference for I
> will keep to myself for the moment.
> I would prefer not to take 2, but could accept it, but suspect it may make
> us unable to properly fulfill our mandate and we would need to do some
> additional investigation regarding the interpretation of the Bylaws and how
> ombudsman issues are resolved.

​Agreed, though I would go further and say I find #2 (completely secret) to
be unacceptable.

Sorry, Tijani, but you need to make a more compelling case of why complete
vote secrecy -- that does not even trust the discretion of the ALAC chair
-- is demanded. It is my view that we must have openness as the default
action, and only compromise it (ie choice #1) in rare and exceptional

- Evan​

More information about the ALAC mailing list