[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Los números son simplemente erróneo. De: carlton.samuels@gmail.com He oído que algunos pueden leer e interpretar lo que escribo en el sentido de que estoy culpando El personal de reportar números equivocados. Usted sería equivocado en ambos. Soy * NO * y no puedo culpar al At-Large. Se trata de la Secretaría que se encarga de verificar los votos. es al Presidente que preside en la Asamblea General y es responsable ante LACRALO para la notificación de los resultados de la Asamblea General. No hay duda del conteo de votos es incorrecta. Y es la LACRALO liderazgo que debe ejercer el deber de cuidado y seguir las reglas y informar correctamente. Esa frase fue mi advertencia a los lectores a esperar a los responsables ante echar la culpa al personal. Y para exponer ese movimiento a la luz antes de que sea hecho. Ritz-Carlton Samuels ============================== Carlton Un Samuels Móvil: 876-818-1799 * Estrategia, Planeación, Gobierno, Evaluación y plazos de entrega * ============================= El Lun, 14 de septiembre 2015 a las 9:13 AM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> escribió:
So another sham of a LACRALO election is endured.
If you believe in a democratic institution based on rules and constitutional authority, the candidate declared the representative of LACRALO to the ALAC for the period 2015-2017 is as illegitimate as the election process was tainted and fraudulent.
Here's more evidence of incompetence and sloth. Those vote numbers that are reported are plain wrong. Look for this to be blamed on staff.
One really need not be a genius in discrete mathematics for it to be immediately obvious that with only 14 ALS voting in affirmative for the 'winner', that could NOT amount to 46% of the vote. It is the weighted percentage that counts, not any other fanciful figure pulled from some febrile brain.
There are 20 countries represented in LACRALO. Each country is CAPPED at 5% of the vote.
That 5% is deemed the Maximum Percentage.
The 5% of vote is shared equally by the ALS in each country.
The contribution of each voter is then proportional to the number of ALS in each country.
Take the case of Argentina. There are nine (9) accredited ALS. Each ALS can only contribute and vote 0.56% of that Maximum Percentage.
Take the case of Nicaragua. With only one (1) ALS, IEEE Nicaragua exercise the maximum 5% on its own for Nicaragua.
LACRALO has forty-seven (47) ALS. Only 30 ALS participated in the sham of an election; BigPulse records 14 votes for Arcos, 8 votes for Rojas and 8 abstentions.
An abstention is counted as a 'no' vote under the rules.
Seventeen (17) ALS were credentialed and did not vote. These could very well be classified 'election not acknowledged for crap'.
See https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=5014vdFeWMZF7tDJbzr4zuiD
The real numbers are as follows :
Did NOT vote - 37.87% Arcos - 27.67% Abstain/No - 19.04% Rojas - 15.42%
There's your 100% of the possible vote accounted!
LACRALO does not have a rule pertaining thresholds for legitimacy or runoffs. But this I know for sure. The 'winner' does not and cannot represent the interests of the Jamaican Internet user at the ALAC. Not on a fraudulent vote.
The spreadsheet will be sent to staff. So that the connection be made to the authoritative precedent, I will also include the spreadsheet used to quantify the votes in 2008 that was originally developed by Nick Ashton-Hart.
-Carlton Samuels
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
[[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/15ca778cae.html --]]