[UA-discuss] UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline

Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile chaals at yandex.ru
Mon Feb 8 06:17:11 UTC 2021


Thank you Mo, Jim.

I have a preference for Meek STV rather than Scottish STV, but I support
all the suggestions Jim made - in particular his "curious option" to  
include allowing a vote for "only 2 vice-chairs".

cheers

Chaals

On Sun, 07 Feb 2021 19:41:19 +1100, Jim DeLaHunt <list+uasg at jdlh.com>
wrote:

>
>   Mo:
>     Thank you for sending this out. It's good that we have a clearly
>      stated election process, and that the process be clear before we
>      add the specific candidates and opinions about which candidates to
>      choose.
>
>
>   I have some suggestions about the elections process as stated in
>      the document you sent, 2021 UASG Election Process and Timeline
>        2021-02-04.pdf , section "2021 UASG Election Process".
>         1. The process does not state that how many Chairs and how many
>        Vice-Chairs are to be elected. Yes, the "UASG Structure" above
>        says that these numbers are "1" and "2-3" respectively. Still,
>        for clarity it seems good to state what the purpose of the
>        process is. I suggest adding an item before old #1, reading
>        something like, "The election will elect one Chair and [2-3
>        Vice-Chairs]".
>
>         2. The process does not state what kind of votes are cast and
>        what method is used to count votes. I support using the same
>        methods as last year, as described in  
> <https://uasg.tech/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Call-for-Nominations.pdf>,
>        namely preferential ballots, counted with Instant Runoff Voting
>        for the single Chair, and Scottish STV for the 2-3 Vice-Chairs.
>        These methods are among the best ways to elect single and
>        multiple winners for a group like UASG. I suggest adding between
>        old #5 and #6, something like: "For the single Chair position,
>        voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices, and
>        the counting method will be Instant Runoff Voting
>        <https://www.opavote.com/methods/instant-runoff-voting>",
>        and "For the 2-3 Vice-Chair positions, voters will cast
>        preferential ballots ranking their choices among all candidates,
>        and the counting method used will be Scottish STV
> <https://www.opavote.com/methods/single-transferable-vote#scottish-stv>."
>
>     3. The process does not define how we will decide whether to
>        elect 2 or 3 Vice-Chairs. There are several rules which we could
>        use. We should state what rule we will follow. I suggest adding
>        it as part of the entry for the Vice-Chair method above. Some
>        rules we could use:
>
>           1. If there are 1, 2, or 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they will
>          all be elected by acclamation and they will not be voted on.
>             2. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they
>          shall be voted on and 3 shall be elected.
>
>       3. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they
>          shall be voted on, and an option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" shall be
>          added to the ballot. Voters may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" the
>          same way as any other candidate. The top two candidates shall
>          be elected. If the option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" is among the
>          top three finishers, there shall only be two Vice-Chairs,
>          otherwise, there shall be three Vice-Chairs, and the
>          third-place candidate shall also be elected. [Note: this
>          curious option means that voters who think some candidates are
>          unsatisfactory, and a Vice-Chair seat should be left empty
>          rather than be filled by those candidates, may rank "Only 2
>          Vice-Chairs" above the unsatisfactory candidates, and the
>          counting will respect their wish to the extent possible.]
>
>         4. I have no problem with the diversity intent of rule # 4, but I
>        think it is a mistake to enforce this at the nomination stage.
>        Suppose there are two candidates in one organization, "M. Good"
>        and "M. Bad". Rule #4 says that M. Bad can prevent voters from
>        supporting M. Good by submitting their own self-nomination
>        first! Instead I suggest that we implement the rule at the
>        vote-counting stage of the Vice-Chair election. As soon as a
>        candidate is elected during the counting process, we disqualify
>        all other candidates from the same organization or company, and
>        continue (or restart) the counting process. This lets voters,
>        not nominators, choose whether to support "M. Good" or "M. Bad".
>        There is no need for this diversity rule in the Chair election,
>        because only one Chair is elected. I suggest a rule about
>        eliminating Vice-Chair candidates during vote-counting be added,
>        and old rule #4 be deleted.
>
>     5. Rule #1 does not clearly say that sock-puppets are forbidden.
>        It should.  By saying "the subscribers… are… the electorate", it
>        implies that email addresses, not natural people, are the
>        electorate. I suggest rewording it to say, "The electorate
>        consists of the natural persons subscribed to the UA-Discuss
>        mailing list on [the date of record for the electorate].  Each
>        person may cast at most one ballot. Sock puppets are forbidden."
>               6. Rule #8 addresses sock puppets as well. Move it to  
> right after
>        rule #1.
>
>     7. Rule #1 (and the Election Timeline below) are not clear about
>        the time at which the UASG-Discuss subscriber list creates the
>        electorate. Rule #1 says "the date of announcing the election".
>        But the Election Timeline puts the label "Announcing the
>        starting of the elections" onto a 10-day period. I suggest
>        adding a separate entry to the timeline, labelled something like
>        "Date and time of record for the electorate". Make it a specific
>        UTC time; dates (interpreted with time zones) can span 48 hours.
>               8. Rule #6 says the election process will be managed by a
>        specialised elections service provider. Who?  Why not just say
>        Opavote?  And it says, "the final results will be audited and
>        confirmed." How? By whom?
>
>     9. I suggest adding a sentence to Rule #6. "A detailed report of
>        the vote counting steps, along with anonymised raw ballot data,
>        shall be published, for transparency and for community
>        auditing." Opavote provides reports and ballot data as a normal
>        part of its service.
>
>         Also, a few comments about the Election Timeline:
>
>
>       1. Dates without times or time zones are ambiguous in a global
>        community. I suggest saying "all dates are UTC", or adding UTC
>        times to each date.
>
>     2. The voting period should have times and time zones added;
>        dates alone are too ambiguous. If the election starts at 00:00 5
>        March UTC and ends at 23:59 15 March UTC, that is 11 days, not
>        10. If it starts on 5 March anywhere in the world, and ends on
>        15 March anywhere in the world, that is 12 days (00:00 5 March
>        UTC-13:00 to 23:59 15 March UTC+12:00). Only if the election
>        period is defined as a specific time and time zone can it be
>        unambiguously 10 days. The voting period in days should match
>        the duration between start and end times.
>
>         3. Suggest adding a timeline entry, "Date and time of record for
>        the electorate". I would recommend it being the same time as the
>        self-nomination period begins, or when the list of candidates is
>        announced. There's a risk of a candidate packing the UA-Discuss
>        with their supporters. The choice of date and time of record can
>        encourage or discourage this.
>
>     I hope this is helpful. Can you tell I am interested in electoral
>      process?
>
>      Best regards,
>
>        —Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada
>
>       On 2021-02-04 12:37, Mohamed Elbashir
>      wrote:
>
>
>>
>>                                             Dear UA
>>                Community,
>>
>>            
>>           Find
>>                attached the UASG 2021 elections process and timeline,
>>                it will be published on the UASG.tech website.
>>
>>
>>            
>>           Thank
>>                you!
>>
>>
>>            
>>           Best
>>                Regards,
>>
>>
>>           Mohamed
>>                  (Mo) Elbashir
>>
>>
>>           Universal
>>                Acceptance (UA) Program Manager
>>
>>
>>           The
>>                Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
>>                (ICANN)
>>                         One World, One
>>                  Internet
>>
>>
>>           [id:image001.png at 01D356F4.3F3911B0]
>>
>>
>>                        
>>         _______________________________________________
>> UA-discuss mailing list
>> UA-discuss at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-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.
>>
>>
>
>   --.   --Jim DeLaHunt, jdlh at jdlh.com     http://blog.jdlh.com/  
> (http://jdlh.com/)
>      multilingual websites consultant
>
>      2201-1000 Beach Ave, Vancouver BC V6E 4M2, Canada
>         Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953
>
>



-- 
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/


More information about the UA-discuss mailing list