---

From:  "'kent crispin'" <kent@icann.org>
To:  GNSO Council <council@gnso.icann.org>
Subject:  Re: [council] SECOND ROUND BALLOT
Date:  Wed, 21 Jun 2006 14:57:57 -0700
>
>Hi Marilyn
>
>On Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 07:51:11PM +0000, Marilyn Cade wrote:
> > This response is not directed at technical staff.  However, this situation
> > with voting is a little strange.
>
>I have run many elections, and from my perspective there was nothing unusual
>about this one.  It's part of an extended history of email elections in the
>ICANN environment, and details, including the use and hazards of email to
>distribute ballots, have hashed out in excruciating detail long beforehand.
>The procedures for this election were posted at
>
>     http://gnso.icann.org/elections/election-procedures-01jun06.htm.
>
>The nature of email is well-known to everyone concerned.  In particular, it
>is well-known that, like physical mail, email can be lost or delayed.  We
>handle that contingency by 1) allowing a full week for balloting, 2)
>providing an alternate web-based interface, and 3) resending ballots whenever
>there is a request.  In extreme cases (documented in the procedures) votes
>can be collected via personal contact with the Secretariat.
>
>Implicit in this arrangement is that people who want to vote are responsible
>for their mailboxes.  We can't control peoples spam filters, or their
>accidental deletions, or their ISP's servers, or simply not noticing the
>email message in their box.
>
> > Three people did not receive ballots,
>
>It was sometimes necessary to resend, but in fact, there was only one person
>who did not ultimately receive a ballot, and, to my knowledge, that person
>did not request another until after the election was over.  Everyone else not
>only received a ballot, but voted.
>
> > although technical staff validate the sending of ballots and receipt but not
> > in the mailbox of the intended recipient.
>
>Delivery is verified to the extent it is technically possible.  Once mail is
>delivered to the remote server it is out of our hands, and it becomes the
>responsibility of the recipient.  We cannot examine the recipients mailbox
>(most people would think that was a good thing :-)).
>
> > I ask that the election "team" work out a way to allow all councilors to vote.
> > We have documented complaints about the flow and receipt of ballots.
> >
> > This needs to be addressed by the General counsel, and adm staff
> > responsible for managing the election, and a process addressed for councilors
> > who did not receive the ballots but stated their intention to vote.
> >
> > Let's not have a contested election over technical failures.
>
> >From my perspective, there have been no reports of anything remotely
>resembling either a technical failure or a process failure.
>
> > I voted in the first round and have a "sent" message in my email outbox.
> > Yet when I asked for verification of receipt, my vote was not received.
> > The second round seems to have worked for me.
>
>Recall that email is an imperfect medium.  In fact, your first round vote was
>ultimately received, and your vote was counted.
>
>It is up to others to decide, of course, but from my perspective this was a
>perfectly reasonable election.
>
>Best Regards
>Kent
>
>--
>Kent Crispin
>kent@icann.org    p: +1 310 823 9358  f: +1 310 823 8649
>