[EURO-Discuss] [EURO-ALS] Voting Porcedure

[Nick Ashton-Hart]

Jeannette:

To be completely clear, this procedure was adopted in Lisbon on March
29th I believe, and this was posted for all ALSes to review
immediately thereafter.

As a consequence, any ALS - or any person - could have queried this
and a debate could have been had at any point in the last six weeks.
There was no such debate and no questions raised - until now.

To reiterate my previous point: every decision reached by the
community such as those in Lisbon cannot be re-opened because one or
two decide, after a long interval, to question it.

The standard decision-making convention in international meetings and
processes is that any decision validly taken may only be reconsidered
if three-quarters of the decision-making body were to decide formally
to reconsider the question. We do not see anything like that level of
interest in doing so in this matter.

On 11/05/07, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:
> Dear Nick,
>
> Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
> > Verner, and all:
> >
> > Could we please, instead of trying to find things to object to, try
> > and find things to agree on.
> >
> > To repeat: there is no difference in the outcome whether one ranks
> > three candidates, or whether you dispose of two individual votes for a
> > candidate of three.
>
> Usually, voting procedures do have strong effects on the outcome. This
> is why they are an issue in almost every country. Think of the debates
> on the advantages and disadvantages of majority systems and
> prepresentattional systems.
> I think this new procedural debate would stop instantly if you could
> bring some proof that these two voting systems produce indeed the very
> same results.
> This is why asked whether we have some information on the results of
> both systems.
> thank you. jeanette
>
> >
> > HOWEVER: insisting on changing everything because one or two
> > individuals want to change what was agreed by a much larger group of
> > ALSes in Lisbon is basically the same as suggesting that any one ALS
> > can veto any decision reached by a much larger group of ALSes.
> >
> > This would result in nothing ever being achieved.
> >
> > On 11/05/07, W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.) <huelsmann at datenschutzverein.de> wrote:
> >
> >>Hello,
> >>
> >>my first question:  "noon UTC" is 1 pm GMT?
> >>
> >>For the ALAC-Seats the rankingsystems makes for me no sense and it seems
> >>to be not democratical for such a few seats to elecect. Therefor we
> >>should use for the election of the ALAC-Seats tweo possible Votes for
> >>each voter.
> >>
> >>Greatings,
> >>
> >>Werner
> >>
> >>Nick Ashton-Hart schrieb:
> >>
> >>>Verner:
> >>>
> >>>Thank you for your note. The first vote will be to decide whether or
> >>>not the single ALS who is not a party to the MoU will be voting on the
> >>>ALAC members and the board members.
> >>>
> >>>That vote will start today.
> >>>
> >>>With respect to the ranking system: This is what was decided in Lisbon
> >>>as the procedure to be used, and so that procedure is carried forward
> >>>to the actual vote. It is the same process that was strongly
> >>>recommended with respect to the board seats, so on a practical level
> >>>it makes sense to use only one type of voting on one ballot to reduce
> >>>confusion.
> >>>
> >>>On 11/05/07, W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.) <huelsmann at datenschutzverein.de>
> >>>wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Hello,
> >>>>
> >>>>on https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007 I read:
> >>>>
> >>>>"VOTERS: The designated voters (1 per ALS) of ALSes who have signed the
> >>>>Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN either in-person at the Lisbon
> >>>>ICANN meeting or digitally via electronic mail - at any time before the
> >>>>beginning of the voting"
> >>>>
> >>>>There must be a mistake: First of all we have to decide, if this "strong
> >>>>recommendation" will be accepted.
> >>>>
> >>>>Next: If there are two seats we have to vote for ALAC, then every voter
> >>>>should have two possible votes. The two candidates with the most votes
> >>>>will be elected. This is the democratical way of election. There ist no
> >>>>need for such a ranking.
> >>>>
> >>>>After the election of the two members for the ALAC seats we have two
> >>>>decide, how many seats shall the EURALO board have. The election of the
> >>>>EURALO boad members can't start before we know how many board members
> >>>>are to elect.
> >>>>
> >>>>Kind Regarts,
> >>>>
> >>>>Werner Hülsmann
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>####################################################
> >>Vorratsdatenspeicherung? Nein Danke!  -  Noch ist es
> >>nicht zu spät: http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de
> >>####################################################
> >>
> >>--
> >>
> >>Dipl. Inform. Werner Hülsmann
> >>Vorstandsmitglied der Deutschen Vereinigung für Datenschutz (DVD) e.V. Obere Laube 48 - D-78462 Konstanz
> >>Tel.: 07531 / 365905-6 Mobil: 0179 / 46 86 484
> >>E-Mail: huelsmann at datenschutzverein.dehttp://www.datenschutzverein.de
> >>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>EURO-ALS mailing list
> >>EURO-ALS at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-als_atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>


-- 
-- 
Regards,

Nick Ashton-Hart
PO Box 32160
London N4 2XY
United Kingdom
UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011
USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460
Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135
mobile: +44 (7774) 932798
Win IM: ashtonhart at hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart at mac.com /
Skype: nashtonhart
Online Bio:   https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart