Hi 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. I assume we will see some statement in this discussion thread. G Glenn McKnight, MA Virtual School of Internet Governance Chief Information Officer www.virtualsig.org *YOUR SOURCE FOR INTERNET GOVERNANCE EDUCATION * *Mobile 437-237-4655*
Hi Glenn, all, It was not normal protocol but indeed an error. Or actually several errors: First, ICANN voting software is... let's say error-prone. While there's no practical way to implement email voting without the system knowing who voted whom, it should not be easy for the person running the election to see that, and now it's so easy that it can happen by accident. It is a design feature that the ballots are shown with ballot IDs. That's not a problem as long as nobody else knows your ballot ID. The idea is that you can see your vote has been correctly counted even if you change your mind and vote again. But as it is, the IANN staffer running the election can see who voted how, and too easily: in this case it apparently happened by accident. And that is where the second error occurred now: the listing included emails and not just ballot IDs as it should have (and did in NCSG elections). The third error was sending the list to npoc-discuss (same error occurred in ncuc and ncsg). As for what should be done about it now: I don't see any benefit in redoing the election. The damage has been done, and if a new election would result in a different result it would only make things worse. In the future we'll have to take care this doesn't happen again. Maybe we should consider doing the elections differently, with some different software, but I can't see any way of avoiding the possibility that whoever runs it screws things up. So maybe just remind both whoever runs the election as well as the Chair to remember this and make sure this doesn't happen again is the best we can do. Tapani On Jun 04 17:22, Glenn McKnight via Npoc-discuss (npoc-discuss@icann.org) wrote:
Hi 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. I assume we will see some statement in this discussion thread. G Glenn McKnight, MA Virtual School of Internet Governance Chief Information Officer www.virtualsig.org *YOUR SOURCE FOR INTERNET GOVERNANCE EDUCATION * *Mobile 437-237-4655*
Hi All At large uses the same software but their election choices were modified a bit and they have never had this issue happen. I guess because the staff there have been better trained and also examine the reports that come out from the system to ensure that the report that was generated only has the ballot ID. It seems our policy staff was not trained well as Andrea Glandon stated she did not even know this type of report was possible. As such she did not take the time to review the report before sending it out to the npoc list. She made the same mistake with ncuc but for sone reason not with ncsg . I would also say the prompts given were not. intuitive so perhaps they can work with other policy staff in training issues and see how other constituencies use the software and do not have these issues I cannot speak to whether the election should be redone since I was running against Emmanuel but I can say that the Sancity of the voting process was indeed violated and trust in the system was harmed. Whether this violation of privacy and sanctity of the election system is large and deep enough to necessitate a new election to regain people’s trust is for staff and leadership to decide but I do think there needs to be an in-depth analysis and for them to analyze the facts and maybe speak to other experts in this field. If they decide that the violation of the election sanctity rise to a high level which I think it did then yes, the best recourse would be to redo the election. Best Judith Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 4, 2023, at 9:21 PM, Tapani Tarvainen via Npoc-discuss <npoc-discuss@icann.org> wrote:
Hi Glenn, all,
It was not normal protocol but indeed an error. Or actually several errors:
First, ICANN voting software is... let's say error-prone. While there's no practical way to implement email voting without the system knowing who voted whom, it should not be easy for the person running the election to see that, and now it's so easy that it can happen by accident.
It is a design feature that the ballots are shown with ballot IDs. That's not a problem as long as nobody else knows your ballot ID. The idea is that you can see your vote has been correctly counted even if you change your mind and vote again.
But as it is, the IANN staffer running the election can see who voted how, and too easily: in this case it apparently happened by accident. And that is where the second error occurred now: the listing included emails and not just ballot IDs as it should have (and did in NCSG elections).
The third error was sending the list to npoc-discuss (same error occurred in ncuc and ncsg).
As for what should be done about it now: I don't see any benefit in redoing the election. The damage has been done, and if a new election would result in a different result it would only make things worse.
In the future we'll have to take care this doesn't happen again. Maybe we should consider doing the elections differently, with some different software, but I can't see any way of avoiding the possibility that whoever runs it screws things up.
So maybe just remind both whoever runs the election as well as the Chair to remember this and make sure this doesn't happen again is the best we can do.
Tapani
On Jun 04 17:22, Glenn McKnight via Npoc-discuss (npoc-discuss@icann.org) wrote:
Hi 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. I assume we will see some statement in this discussion thread. G Glenn McKnight, MA Virtual School of Internet Governance Chief Information Officer www.virtualsig.org *YOUR SOURCE FOR INTERNET GOVERNANCE EDUCATION * *Mobile 437-237-4655*
_______________________________________________ Npoc-discuss mailing list Npoc-discuss@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.
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
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@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@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.*
Hi Jean I understand your position that we need to move forward but I would like to suggest the EC craft a strong statement to staff so that they are formal notice by community that this error isn't a simple mistake but a critical error which requires them to come clean on the mistake and provide a move forward strategy. I am not suggesting they beat themselves with sticks but acknowledgement is the first step and assurances that its a lesson learnt and moving onward with adequate protocals. G Glenn McKnight, MA Virtual School of Internet Governance Chief Information Officer www.virtualsig.org *YOUR SOURCE FOR INTERNET GOVERNANCE EDUCATION * *Mobile 437-237-4655* On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 at 13:43, Jean F. Quéralt via Npoc-discuss < npoc-discuss@icann.org> wrote:
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@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@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.* _______________________________________________ Npoc-discuss mailing list Npoc-discuss@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.
Absolutely onboard with that. Jean F. Queralt Founder & CEO - The IO Foundation <http://www.TheIOFoundation.org> Book a meeting <http://TIOF.Click/BookJFQ> (30 minutes) On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 at 01:51, Glenn McKnight <mcknight.glenn@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Jean I understand your position that we need to move forward but I would like to suggest the EC craft a strong statement to staff so that they are formal notice by community that this error isn't a simple mistake but a critical error which requires them to come clean on the mistake and provide a move forward strategy. I am not suggesting they beat themselves with sticks but acknowledgement is the first step and assurances that its a lesson learnt and moving onward with adequate protocals. G Glenn McKnight, MA Virtual School of Internet Governance Chief Information Officer www.virtualsig.org *YOUR SOURCE FOR INTERNET GOVERNANCE EDUCATION * *Mobile 437-237-4655*
On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 at 13:43, Jean F. Quéralt via Npoc-discuss < npoc-discuss@icann.org> wrote:
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@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@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.* _______________________________________________ Npoc-discuss mailing list Npoc-discuss@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.*
Hi all, In as much as the election reporting error should have not happened, but the reality is that it has already happened. As someone rightly said, seeing people who call themselves your friends voting against you can be disheartening and could cost some relationships. However, I suggest we do not "fight" our supporting Org staff who have worked with us so well all these while. There is a proverb in Ghana that says that you cannot throw away a baby in the bath water! This is to say that no matter how angry you are, we should take time to consider the outcome of our reactions. On this note, I suggest we let the issue go, without necessarily writing to staff to show our displeasure. It has already happened. Let us move on in unity as always. Regards, Raymond Mamattah [image: linkedin] <https://www.linkedin.com/in/raymond-selorm-mamattah-02637610/> [image: facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/selorm.mamattah> [image: twitter] <https://twitter.com/RMamattah> Accra, Ghana On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 6:03 PM Jean F. Quéralt via Npoc-discuss < npoc-discuss@icann.org> wrote:
Absolutely onboard with that.
Jean F. Queralt Founder & CEO - The IO Foundation <http://www.TheIOFoundation.org> Book a meeting <http://TIOF.Click/BookJFQ> (30 minutes)
On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 at 01:51, Glenn McKnight <mcknight.glenn@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Jean I understand your position that we need to move forward but I would like to suggest the EC craft a strong statement to staff so that they are formal notice by community that this error isn't a simple mistake but a critical error which requires them to come clean on the mistake and provide a move forward strategy. I am not suggesting they beat themselves with sticks but acknowledgement is the first step and assurances that its a lesson learnt and moving onward with adequate protocals. G Glenn McKnight, MA Virtual School of Internet Governance Chief Information Officer www.virtualsig.org *YOUR SOURCE FOR INTERNET GOVERNANCE EDUCATION * *Mobile 437-237-4655*
On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 at 13:43, Jean F. Quéralt via Npoc-discuss < npoc-discuss@icann.org> wrote:
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@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@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.* _______________________________________________ Npoc-discuss mailing list Npoc-discuss@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.* _______________________________________________ Npoc-discuss mailing list Npoc-discuss@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.
Hi Raymond, Issuing a statement to establish our discontent is not tantamount to bashing the staff. Not issuing a statement is tantamount to "we can't bother", which is a dangerous move. Everyone is accountable to anything they do, regardless of past performance. We do not need to be nasty (I don't think anyone wants that), we still need to make the point as it may have damaged some people. Best, Jean F. Queralt Founder & CEO - The IO Foundation <http://www.TheIOFoundation.org> Book a meeting <http://TIOF.Click/BookJFQ> (30 minutes) On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 at 03:37, Raymond Mamattah via Npoc-discuss < npoc-discuss@icann.org> wrote:
Hi all,
In as much as the election reporting error should have not happened, but the reality is that it has already happened. As someone rightly said, seeing people who call themselves your friends voting against you can be disheartening and could cost some relationships.
However, I suggest we do not "fight" our supporting Org staff who have worked with us so well all these while. There is a proverb in Ghana that says that you cannot throw away a baby in the bath water! This is to say that no matter how angry you are, we should take time to consider the outcome of our reactions.
On this note, I suggest we let the issue go, without necessarily writing to staff to show our displeasure. It has already happened. Let us move on in unity as always.
Regards, Raymond Mamattah [image: linkedin] <https://www.linkedin.com/in/raymond-selorm-mamattah-02637610/> [image: facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/selorm.mamattah> [image: twitter] <https://twitter.com/RMamattah> Accra, Ghana
On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 6:03 PM Jean F. Quéralt via Npoc-discuss < npoc-discuss@icann.org> wrote:
Absolutely onboard with that.
Jean F. Queralt Founder & CEO - The IO Foundation <http://www.TheIOFoundation.org> Book a meeting <http://TIOF.Click/BookJFQ> (30 minutes)
On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 at 01:51, Glenn McKnight <mcknight.glenn@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Jean I understand your position that we need to move forward but I would like to suggest the EC craft a strong statement to staff so that they are formal notice by community that this error isn't a simple mistake but a critical error which requires them to come clean on the mistake and provide a move forward strategy. I am not suggesting they beat themselves with sticks but acknowledgement is the first step and assurances that its a lesson learnt and moving onward with adequate protocals. G Glenn McKnight, MA Virtual School of Internet Governance Chief Information Officer www.virtualsig.org *YOUR SOURCE FOR INTERNET GOVERNANCE EDUCATION * *Mobile 437-237-4655*
On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 at 13:43, Jean F. Quéralt via Npoc-discuss < npoc-discuss@icann.org> wrote:
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@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@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.* _______________________________________________ Npoc-discuss mailing list Npoc-discuss@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.* _______________________________________________ Npoc-discuss mailing list Npoc-discuss@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.
_______________________________________________ Npoc-discuss mailing list Npoc-discuss@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.*
On 06/06/2023 19:42, Jean F. Quéralt wrote:
- I made the conscious decision to not look into the document after the fact (just the idea of it gives me cancer)
Thank you taking the moral high road, and I hope others followed your example. Fortunately the voters were not published in the NCSG election results (where I was running against the always formidable opponent A.B.Stain), but I have no interest in knowing who voted for me and who didn't. If people vote against me, I assume because they feel I haven't been doing a good job - doesn't matter who they are, the burden is on me to improve.
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.
Hear hear! Julf
participants (7)
-
Bikram Shrestha -
Glenn McKnight -
Jean F. Quéralt -
Johan Helsingius -
Judith Hellerstein -
Raymond Mamattah -
Tapani Tarvainen