The ballot is not worded like the motion. The ballot says "Should voters be able to see the votes of others while the ballot is still open?" If we can be assured that none of us could see the votes of others while the ballot is still open, I'd vote "yes", but I believe that it is possible that some of us could see the votes, such as excom (which could be the very people the ballot is about), while other's could not. If I'm assured no one could see the votes, then I'd change my vote to "yes". Paul -----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 6:28 AM To: 'Registrars Constituency' Subject: [registrars] Clarification of the current ballot Just so there's no misunderstandings, please see the original motion that resulted in this ballot. Given the way the ballot is presented, and the motion it represents, a vote of NO on this ballot is in effect a vote FOR option 1 below. Tim -----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 6:59 PM To: 'Registrars Constituency' Subject: RE: [registrars] Motion to amend voting procedures.
MOTION: I hereby move that we have a runoff election between the two proposals with the highest percentage of the prior vote, specifically:
1. Post individual voting results, but only at the conclusion of the voting period. 2. Continue to post individual voting results, during the entire voting period.
end quote:
I endorse this motion. Tim Ruiz