[Npoc-discuss] Election Reporting situation

[Jean F. Quéralt]

About this subject, I'd like to make some comments at a personal level.

- I did not see that the voting was appended to the posted document. I only
paid attention to the first page with the results.
- I got to know that something went wrong when reading further comments on
the thread.
- Yes, it's a really bad look and should have never happened.
- I made the conscious decision to not look into the document after the
fact (just the idea of it gives me cancer)

Why am I mentioning this?

Because I don't care who voted for whom and no one should either.
It is incumbent upon us to make sure that the expected rules of the process
are observed and respected and this no matter the circumstances.

*If we have the right to vote, we also have the responsibility to protect
the voting mechanism and anything revolving around it.*
Taking advantage of looking into who voted to whom is akin to breaking the
Chatham House Rule.

For as much as I am concerned, I am elected to help all NPOC, not only
those who voted for me. I am not interested in knowing, I am interested in
getting things done.

Obviously I hope that this situation does not happen again (and this should
be a ticket to fix with the new chairs) and as far as I am concerned, I am
moving page and looking forward to work on Comms.

Best,
Jean F. Queralt
Founder & CEO - The IO Foundation <http://www.TheIOFoundation.org>
Book a meeting <http://TIOF.Click/BookJFQ> (30 minutes)


On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 at 22:21, Johan Helsingius via Npoc-discuss <
npoc-discuss at icann.org> wrote:

> On 04/06/2023 23:22, Glenn McKnight via Npoc-discuss wrote:
> > I  don't  know if the election reporting is a normal protocol for NPOC
> > or its a simple error to reveal how everyone votes.   Regardless we have
> > a serious  situation that needs to be addressed asap as it  will clearly
> > be escalated and ignoring it isn't a good option.   A  reelection seems
> > logical but not sure if it would generate any change in the results.
>
> Definitely not normal - it was an administrative double error.
>
> Unfortunately a re-election won't rectify the situation. The results of
> the election are not dependent on the publishing of who voted for whom,
> and the damage in terms of violating confidentiality has already
> happened and can't be undone.
>
> All we can do is ensure it won't happen again.
>
>         Julf
> _______________________________________________
> Npoc-discuss mailing list
> Npoc-discuss at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/npoc-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

-- 
**DISCLAIMER**
*The content of this message, which may contain personal or 
sensitive data, is confidential. If you have received it by mistake, please 
inform the sender by replying to the email and then permanently delete the 
message, including any attachments. It is forbidden to copy, forward or in 
any way reveal the content of this message to anyone. The integrity and 
security of this email cannot be guaranteed over the Internet and, 
therefore, the sender will not be held liable for any damage caused by the 
message.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/npoc-discuss/attachments/20230607/1fac3a68/attachment-0001.html>