[NA-Discuss] Voting None of the Above Re: .

Garth Bruen at Knujon.com gbruen at knujon.com
Wed Jul 18 18:08:57 UTC 2012

I would encourage anyone to vote their conscience or put their own name 
forward while time is left.

With that said please consider that I put my name forward partly for the 
sake of competition within the group. I had no expectations to win by 

Also, these positions are about responsibility and not authority. We are all 
volunteers and a coordinator of other volunteers is never an easy task. 
However, I'm hoping for the opportunity to increase voices in the region.

From: "Avri Doria" <avri at ella.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 12:24 PM
To: "NA-Discuss Discuss" <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Subject: [NA-Discuss] Voting None of the Above Re:  .

> On 15 Jul 2012, at 14:07, Alan Greenberg wrote:
>> At this point, unless I missed something, we have just one volunteer for 
>> the position starting at the end of the AGM, so if that does not change, 
>> the past practice would be to acclaim the winner. I Presume there will be 
>> a discussion this Monday on whether to try to formally fill the position 
>> in the interim, or follow a more ad hoc process.
> Although I don't have a vote, and could not even make the last meeting, 
> and thus really have no standing in this topic, I have to say that I would 
> not be able to vote in an election where there was just a single candidate 
> for an office without such an option - and will recommend to the voter in 
> my ALS that he not do so.
> Now others have offered that this is a reasonable option, but I disagree, 
> as that removes someones ability to vote.  If the only way I can vote no 
> is to not vote, my vote has been removed.
> Aside: Even on local elections, if there is only one candidate, I write in 
> "None of the above." because I beleive that having a choice is more 
> important in the democratic process than any particular choice
> If people hate the idea of a none of the above option, perhaps we need a 
> write in option.
> As for the vote versus the consensus, i think this favors the few who 
> actually attend the meeting and does not draw in the rest of the 
> membership.  While I think picking an interim chair by consensus of those 
> present is an OK thing, I really think that voting is necessary for 
> leadership positions - otherwise it is always the active few that makes 
> the decisions - shutting out the rest of the membership.  No wonder they 
> don't really care about what goes on - it is a 'make the meetings or else' 
> world.
> One of the major accusations people have about ICANN politics is that it 
> is all done by self-selected cliques.  This feeds into that mentality.
> avri
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------

More information about the NA-Discuss mailing list