[CCWG-ACCT] Minority Statements

[Greg Shatan]

I assume "nut voting" is a typo.

But the other possibilities are interesting to consider.

On Saturday, August 1, 2015, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el at lisse.na> wrote:

> What about
>
> not present nut voting (by proxy)?
>
> el
>
> --
> Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
>
> > On Aug 1, 2015, at 20:48, Steve Crocker <steve at shinkuro.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > Alan,
> >
> > I am both curious and willing to help on the technical aspects of the
> combining multiple requires or desires into an implementable plan.
> >
> > Is it possible to gather the multiple requirements and/or desires so we
> can see whether a feasible solution exists?
> >
> > Let me offer some candidate terminology that may be granular enough to
> help express the desired results.
> >
> > Within a given group and with respect to a particular vote, the
> individuals will usually fall into one of the following five categories:
> >
> > o (NP) Not present (and hence not participating)
> >
> > o (Rec) Present but not voting because of recusal, usually because of
> self-declared conflict or because the the group perceives a conflict.
> >
> > o (Abs) Present but not voting because the individual doesn’t wish to
> express either a positive or negative vote.
> >
> > o (No) Present and voting no.
> >
> > o (Yes) Present and voting yes.
> >
> > Can you express the desired results in terms of one or more
> inequalities, ratios or other expressions among these terms?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Aug 1, 2015, at 11:57 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Ed, I believe that I was the first one to make a strong statement that
> abstentions should be excluded from the vote. As few of us worked VERY hard
> to come up with a vote-counting methodology that did that and at the same
> time did not allow a very small part of the community (the ones who "care"
> about the issue) to make momentous decisions on behalf of ICANN.
> >>
> >> We did arrive at some scenarios that were acceptable from the point of
> view of outcomes, but that were difficult to implement and perhaps more
> importantly to explain. In addition to the simple Yes vs No count that you
> allude to, it involved parallel requirements for a minimum number of SO/ACs
> to support the proposition (and that support was absolute, only counting
> Yes votes vs the maximum that could be cast), and perhaps requiring a
> minimum number of non-sbstention votes to be cast. As I said, it might
> work, but would be a black-box and completely opaque method to those who
> did not take the time to thoroughly understand it.
> >>
> >> If you can come up with a simple, clear way of doing it, please propose
> one.
> >>
> >> Alan
> >>
> >>
> >> At 01/08/2015 08:10 AM, Edward Morris wrote:
> >>> About twenty minutes ago I submitted directly to the Chairs, per the
> instructions given to us by Thomas in his email of 29 July, two minority
> statements for (hopefully) inclusion in the report about to be released for
> public comment. I had not intended to file any minority statement but, upon
> reflection, two aspects of our proposal caused me concern.
> >>>
> >>> The statements are attached here for community inspection and review.
> >>>
> >>> Kind regards,
> >>>
> >>> Edward Morris
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> >>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org <javascript:;>
> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> >> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org <javascript:;>
> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> > Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org <javascript:;>
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org <javascript:;>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150801/aea47ee6/attachment.html>