[lac-discuss-en] VOTE RESULTS: LACRALO Confirmation Poll - ALAC Representative (2015 AGM - 2017 AGM)

Tue Jul 28 15:42:58 UTC 2015

Dear Staff,

I question your interpretation of this outcome. Since there was only one
nomination, the onus is on the “no” vote to win. An abstention is not a “no”
vote but it is a vote and hence even though not a yes vote, cannot be
counted as a “no” vote. Therefore the “no” vote must exceed all other votes
to win. In this case it has not.

Note that this is not a matter of adding the abstentions to the ‘yes” vote.
There are three results and for any result to win it must exceed the total
amount of the other results plus one. Note very clearly that this is not a
vote for more than one candidate where only the yes and no votes count. Here
is a matter to confirm a candidate and the only way that candidate can lose
is if the majority vote of the group votes no.

Especially in this case where this is an online vote which gives the entire
group the opportunity to vote over time. According to our rules a quorum is
not required for an online vote for the specific fact that all members are
deemed to be present. Unless a member is deemed inactive, it would seem to
me that the no vote should be half of the entire group plus one and not just
half plus one of those voting, where it should not matter whether or not all
the other members voted yes, abstained or did not vote. My understanding is
that LACRALO has 47 members. Hence a no vote of 23.5 + 1 = 24.5 votes would
have to be amounted by the “no” vote in order to win. You are not worrying
about a quorum because all members are deemed present. Even if you did it
based on the amount voting, the no vote still loses since the requirement
would be 21.5 + 1 votes = 22.5 votes and since there are no half votes, that
would be 23 votes to win because you need 22.5 votes to  win.

It would seem to me that in the spirit of a democratic and transparent
process and where one person is to be confirmed, that the onus must be on
the “no” vote to exceed half of the members of the constituency. For those
who abstained or did not vote, there is only one consideration and that is
that if more than half the group did not want to confirm a candidate, they
would rise up and ensure they voted no. That did not happen in this case.
Sufficient people did not say no or voted no and hence the confirmation
process is complete in favour of the candidate. Any other way of
interpreting this can only run counter to the spirit of democracy and would
be less than transparent. Actually bordering on unfair and manipulative.

I am therefore calling on staff to recall that message and post a correct
message based on the fact that the “no” vote needs 23 votes since all
members are assumed present and a result is based on the majority of the
constituency because there is only one candidate in the confirmation
process.

Thanking you for your cooperation.

ROK

From: lac-discuss-en-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
[mailto:lac-discuss-en-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of ICANN
At-Large Staff
Sent: Tuesday, 28 July 2015 09:53
To: lac-discuss-es at atlarge-lists.icann.org;
lac-discuss-en at atlarge-lists.icann.org
Subject: [lac-discuss-en] VOTE RESULTS: LACRALO Confirmation Poll - ALAC
Representative (2015 AGM - 2017 AGM)

== EN== 

Dear All, 

Kindly note that the LACRALO Confirmation Poll – ALAC Representative (2015
AGM – 2017 AGM) is now closed. Please see below the vote result being sent
on behalf of Alberto Soto, Chair of LACRALO, and Humberto Carrasco,
Secretary of LACRALO.

— 

QUESTION: Do you wish to confirm Lance Hinds as the ALAC representative from
LACRALO for the period AGM2015 through AGM2017?

*Yes

*No

*Abstention 

—

As at Poll close: Monday 27 July 2015 23:00 UTC
Number of voters: 43 · Group size: 47 · Percentage voted: 91.49
Ranked by votes 

Rank

Options

Votes

%

1

No/No

21

48.84

2

Yes/Si

19

44.19

3

Abstain/Abstención

3

6.98

Counting only Yes and No votes, the percentages are:

No 21/40 = 52.5%

Yes 19/40 = 47.5%

The selection process for the ALAC seat currently occupied by Fatima
Cambronero will be restarted with a new call for nominations. 

You may view the result independently under:
https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=4940Zw4m2YAWxvmPU7PAWLyP 

== ES == 

Hola a todos, 

Favor de notar que la Encuesta de Confirmación de LACRALO para el
Representante en ALAC (2015-2017 AGM) se encuentra cerrada. Por favor,
encuentre enseguida el resultado de la votación el cual está siendo enviado
en nombre de Alberto Soto, Presidente de LACRALO y Humberto Carrasco,
Secretario de LACRALO. 

— 

PREGUNTA: Desea confirmar a Lance Hinds como representante de LACRALO ante
el ALAC para el periodo del  AGM2015 hasta el AGM2017?

*Si

*No

*Abstención

—

Al cerrar el voto: Lunes 27 de Julio 2015 23:00 GMT

Número de votantes: 43 · Tamaño del grupo: 47 · Porcentaje de voto: 91.49 

clasificado por votos

Posición

Opciones

Votos

%

1

No/No

21

48.84

2

Yes/Si

19

44.19

3

Abstain/Abstención

3

6.98

Contando solamente los votos 'Si' y 'No', los porcentajes son:

No 21/40 = 52.5%

Si 19/40 = 47.5%

El proceso de selección para el asiento de ALAC actualmente ocupado por
Fátima Cambronero será reiniciado a través de una nueva convocatoria. 

Puede revisar los resultados independientemente bajo:
https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=4940Zw4m2YAWxvmPU7PAWLyP

Regards,

Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie
Peregrine and Terri Agnew

ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC

E-mail: staff at atlarge.icann.org

Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann <https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>
atlarge <https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> 

Twitter: @ <https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge> ICANNAtLarge
<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en/attachments/20150728/fc0d7605/attachment-0001.html>