UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline
Dear UA Community, Find attached the UASG 2021 elections process and timeline, it will be published on the UASG.tech website. Thank you! Best Regards, Mohamed (Mo) Elbashir Universal Acceptance (UA) Program Manager The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) One World, One Internet [id:image001.png@01D356F4.3F3911B0]
Mo: Thank you for sending this out. It's good that we have a clearly stated election process, and that the process be clear before we add the specific candidates and opinions about which candidates to choose. I have some suggestions about the elections process as stated in the document you sent, /2021 UASG Election Process and Timeline 2021-02-04.pdf/ , section "2021 UASG Election Process". 1. The process does not state that how many Chairs and how many Vice-Chairs are to be elected. Yes, the "UASG Structure" above says that these numbers are "1" and "2-3" respectively. Still, for clarity it seems good to state what the purpose of the process is. I suggest adding an item before old #1, reading something like, "The election will elect one Chair and [2-3 Vice-Chairs]". 2. The process does not state what kind of votes are cast and what method is used to count votes. I support using the same methods as last year, as described in <https://uasg.tech/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Call-for-Nominations.pdf <https://uasg.tech/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Call-for-Nominations.pdf>>, namely preferential ballots, counted with Instant Runoff Voting for the single Chair, and Scottish STV for the 2-3 Vice-Chairs. These methods are among the best ways to elect single and multiple winners for a group like UASG. I suggest adding between old #5 and #6, something like: "For the single Chair position, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices, and the counting method will be Instant Runoff Voting <https://www.opavote.com/methods/instant-runoff-voting>", and "For the 2-3 Vice-Chair positions, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices among all candidates, and the counting method used will be Scottish STV <https://www.opavote.com/methods/single-transferable-vote#scottish-stv>." 3. The process does not define how we will decide whether to elect 2 or 3 Vice-Chairs. There are several rules which we could use. We should state what rule we will follow. I suggest adding it as part of the entry for the Vice-Chair method above. Some rules we could use: 1. If there are 1, 2, or 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they will all be elected by acclamation and they will not be voted on. 2. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on and 3 shall be elected. 3. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on, and an option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" shall be added to the ballot. Voters may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" the same way as any other candidate. The top two candidates shall be elected. If the option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" is among the top three finishers, there shall only be two Vice-Chairs, otherwise, there shall be three Vice-Chairs, and the third-place candidate shall also be elected. [Note: this curious option means that voters who think some candidates are unsatisfactory, and a Vice-Chair seat should be left empty rather than be filled by those candidates, may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" above the unsatisfactory candidates, and the counting will respect their wish to the extent possible.] 4. I have no problem with the diversity intent of rule # 4, but I think it is a mistake to enforce this at the nomination stage. Suppose there are two candidates in one organization, "M. Good" and "M. Bad". Rule #4 says that M. Bad can prevent voters from supporting M. Good by submitting their own self-nomination first! Instead I suggest that we implement the rule at the vote-counting stage of the Vice-Chair election. As soon as a candidate is elected during the counting process, we disqualify all other candidates from the same organization or company, and continue (or restart) the counting process. This lets voters, not nominators, choose whether to support "M. Good" or "M. Bad". There is no need for this diversity rule in the Chair election, because only one Chair is elected. I suggest a rule about eliminating Vice-Chair candidates during vote-counting be added, and old rule #4 be deleted. 5. Rule #1 does not clearly say that sock-puppets are forbidden. It should. By saying "the subscribers… are… the electorate", it implies that email addresses, not natural people, are the electorate. I suggest rewording it to say, "The electorate consists of the natural persons subscribed to the UA-Discuss mailing list on [the date of record for the electorate]. Each person may cast at most one ballot. Sock puppets are forbidden." 6. Rule #8 addresses sock puppets as well. Move it to right after rule #1. 7. Rule #1 (and the Election Timeline below) are not clear about the time at which the UASG-Discuss subscriber list creates the electorate. Rule #1 says "the date of announcing the election". But the Election Timeline puts the label "Announcing the starting of the elections" onto a 10-day period. I suggest adding a separate entry to the timeline, labelled something like "Date and time of record for the electorate". Make it a specific UTC time; dates (interpreted with time zones) can span 48 hours. 8. Rule #6 says the election process will be managed by a specialised elections service provider. Who? Why not just say Opavote? And it says, "the final results will be audited and confirmed." How? By whom? 9. I suggest adding a sentence to Rule #6. "A detailed report of the vote counting steps, along with anonymised raw ballot data, shall be published, for transparency and for community auditing." Opavote provides reports and ballot data as a normal part of its service. Also, a few comments about the Election Timeline: 1. Dates without times or time zones are ambiguous in a global community. I suggest saying "all dates are UTC", or adding UTC times to each date. 2. The voting period should have times and time zones added; dates alone are too ambiguous. If the election starts at 00:00 5 March UTC and ends at 23:59 15 March UTC, that is 11 days, not 10. If it starts on 5 March anywhere in the world, and ends on 15 March anywhere in the world, that is 12 days (00:00 5 March UTC-13:00 to 23:59 15 March UTC+12:00). Only if the election period is defined as a specific time and time zone can it be unambiguously 10 days. The voting period in days should match the duration between start and end times. 3. Suggest adding a timeline entry, "Date and time of record for the electorate". I would recommend it being the same time as the self-nomination period begins, or when the list of candidates is announced. There's a risk of a candidate packing the UA-Discuss with their supporters. The choice of date and time of record can encourage or discourage this. I hope this is helpful. Can you tell I am interested in electoral process? Best regards, —Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada On 2021-02-04 12:37, Mohamed Elbashir wrote:
Dear UA Community,
Find attached the UASG 2021 elections process and timeline, it will be published on the UASG.tech website.
Thank you!
Best Regards,
*Mohamed (Mo) Elbashir*
Universal Acceptance (UA) Program Manager
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
/One World, One Internet/
id:image001.png@01D356F4.3F3911B0
_______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-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.
-- . --Jim DeLaHunt, jdlh@jdlh.com http://blog.jdlh.com/ (http://jdlh.com/) multilingual websites consultant 2201-1000 Beach Ave, Vancouver BC V6E 4M2, Canada Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953
Thank you Mo, Jim. I have a preference for Meek STV rather than Scottish STV, but I support all the suggestions Jim made - in particular his "curious option" to include allowing a vote for "only 2 vice-chairs". cheers Chaals On Sun, 07 Feb 2021 19:41:19 +1100, Jim DeLaHunt <list+uasg@jdlh.com> wrote:
Mo: Thank you for sending this out. It's good that we have a clearly stated election process, and that the process be clear before we add the specific candidates and opinions about which candidates to choose.
I have some suggestions about the elections process as stated in the document you sent, 2021 UASG Election Process and Timeline 2021-02-04.pdf , section "2021 UASG Election Process". 1. The process does not state that how many Chairs and how many Vice-Chairs are to be elected. Yes, the "UASG Structure" above says that these numbers are "1" and "2-3" respectively. Still, for clarity it seems good to state what the purpose of the process is. I suggest adding an item before old #1, reading something like, "The election will elect one Chair and [2-3 Vice-Chairs]".
2. The process does not state what kind of votes are cast and what method is used to count votes. I support using the same methods as last year, as described in <https://uasg.tech/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Call-for-Nominations.pdf>, namely preferential ballots, counted with Instant Runoff Voting for the single Chair, and Scottish STV for the 2-3 Vice-Chairs. These methods are among the best ways to elect single and multiple winners for a group like UASG. I suggest adding between old #5 and #6, something like: "For the single Chair position, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices, and the counting method will be Instant Runoff Voting <https://www.opavote.com/methods/instant-runoff-voting>", and "For the 2-3 Vice-Chair positions, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices among all candidates, and the counting method used will be Scottish STV <https://www.opavote.com/methods/single-transferable-vote#scottish-stv>."
3. The process does not define how we will decide whether to elect 2 or 3 Vice-Chairs. There are several rules which we could use. We should state what rule we will follow. I suggest adding it as part of the entry for the Vice-Chair method above. Some rules we could use:
1. If there are 1, 2, or 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they will all be elected by acclamation and they will not be voted on. 2. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on and 3 shall be elected.
3. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on, and an option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" shall be added to the ballot. Voters may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" the same way as any other candidate. The top two candidates shall be elected. If the option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" is among the top three finishers, there shall only be two Vice-Chairs, otherwise, there shall be three Vice-Chairs, and the third-place candidate shall also be elected. [Note: this curious option means that voters who think some candidates are unsatisfactory, and a Vice-Chair seat should be left empty rather than be filled by those candidates, may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" above the unsatisfactory candidates, and the counting will respect their wish to the extent possible.]
4. I have no problem with the diversity intent of rule # 4, but I think it is a mistake to enforce this at the nomination stage. Suppose there are two candidates in one organization, "M. Good" and "M. Bad". Rule #4 says that M. Bad can prevent voters from supporting M. Good by submitting their own self-nomination first! Instead I suggest that we implement the rule at the vote-counting stage of the Vice-Chair election. As soon as a candidate is elected during the counting process, we disqualify all other candidates from the same organization or company, and continue (or restart) the counting process. This lets voters, not nominators, choose whether to support "M. Good" or "M. Bad". There is no need for this diversity rule in the Chair election, because only one Chair is elected. I suggest a rule about eliminating Vice-Chair candidates during vote-counting be added, and old rule #4 be deleted.
5. Rule #1 does not clearly say that sock-puppets are forbidden. It should. By saying "the subscribers… are… the electorate", it implies that email addresses, not natural people, are the electorate. I suggest rewording it to say, "The electorate consists of the natural persons subscribed to the UA-Discuss mailing list on [the date of record for the electorate]. Each person may cast at most one ballot. Sock puppets are forbidden." 6. Rule #8 addresses sock puppets as well. Move it to right after rule #1.
7. Rule #1 (and the Election Timeline below) are not clear about the time at which the UASG-Discuss subscriber list creates the electorate. Rule #1 says "the date of announcing the election". But the Election Timeline puts the label "Announcing the starting of the elections" onto a 10-day period. I suggest adding a separate entry to the timeline, labelled something like "Date and time of record for the electorate". Make it a specific UTC time; dates (interpreted with time zones) can span 48 hours. 8. Rule #6 says the election process will be managed by a specialised elections service provider. Who? Why not just say Opavote? And it says, "the final results will be audited and confirmed." How? By whom?
9. I suggest adding a sentence to Rule #6. "A detailed report of the vote counting steps, along with anonymised raw ballot data, shall be published, for transparency and for community auditing." Opavote provides reports and ballot data as a normal part of its service.
Also, a few comments about the Election Timeline:
1. Dates without times or time zones are ambiguous in a global community. I suggest saying "all dates are UTC", or adding UTC times to each date.
2. The voting period should have times and time zones added; dates alone are too ambiguous. If the election starts at 00:00 5 March UTC and ends at 23:59 15 March UTC, that is 11 days, not 10. If it starts on 5 March anywhere in the world, and ends on 15 March anywhere in the world, that is 12 days (00:00 5 March UTC-13:00 to 23:59 15 March UTC+12:00). Only if the election period is defined as a specific time and time zone can it be unambiguously 10 days. The voting period in days should match the duration between start and end times.
3. Suggest adding a timeline entry, "Date and time of record for the electorate". I would recommend it being the same time as the self-nomination period begins, or when the list of candidates is announced. There's a risk of a candidate packing the UA-Discuss with their supporters. The choice of date and time of record can encourage or discourage this.
I hope this is helpful. Can you tell I am interested in electoral process?
Best regards,
—Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada
On 2021-02-04 12:37, Mohamed Elbashir wrote:
Dear UA Community,
Find attached the UASG 2021 elections process and timeline, it will be published on the UASG.tech website.
Thank you!
Best Regards,
Mohamed (Mo) Elbashir
Universal Acceptance (UA) Program Manager
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) One World, One Internet
[id:image001.png@01D356F4.3F3911B0]
_______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-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.
--. --Jim DeLaHunt, jdlh@jdlh.com http://blog.jdlh.com/ (http://jdlh.com/) multilingual websites consultant
2201-1000 Beach Ave, Vancouver BC V6E 4M2, Canada Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953
-- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
+1 Mike - candidates SHOULD be able to describe how they and/or their organizations are advancing UA. From: UA-discuss <ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Mike Hemp Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 4:56 AM To: Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile <chaals@yandex.ru> Cc: ua-discuss@icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [UA-discuss] UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline Thank you Chaals , Jim, MO and everyone . Jim +1 change when needed. dont make us learn new proceses which are used once in two years. I ok for what has worked for us till now. more importantly, people in leadership should tell what they have done to execute UA implementation in the there own organisation-helped-moviated others. When they nominate they must mention this. We need people who are UA practitioners like people from Microsoft, Gmail, XgenPlus, Apple, Postfix and others. Best Mike Sent: Monday, February 08, 2021 at 11:47 AM From: "Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile" <chaals@yandex.ru<mailto:chaals@yandex.ru>> To: ua-discuss@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline Thank you Mo, Jim. I have a preference for Meek STV rather than Scottish STV, but I support all the suggestions Jim made - in particular his "curious option" to include allowing a vote for "only 2 vice-chairs". cheers Chaals On Sun, 07 Feb 2021 19:41:19 +1100, Jim DeLaHunt <list+uasg@jdlh.com<mailto:list+uasg@jdlh.com>> wrote:
Mo: Thank you for sending this out. It's good that we have a clearly stated election process, and that the process be clear before we add the specific candidates and opinions about which candidates to choose.
I have some suggestions about the elections process as stated in the document you sent, 2021 UASG Election Process and Timeline 2021-02-04.pdf , section "2021 UASG Election Process". 1. The process does not state that how many Chairs and how many Vice-Chairs are to be elected. Yes, the "UASG Structure" above says that these numbers are "1" and "2-3" respectively. Still, for clarity it seems good to state what the purpose of the process is. I suggest adding an item before old #1, reading something like, "The election will elect one Chair and [2-3 Vice-Chairs]".
2. The process does not state what kind of votes are cast and what method is used to count votes. I support using the same methods as last year, as described in <https://uasg.tech/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Call-for-Nominations.pdf<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fuasg.tech%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F02%2FCall-for-Nominations.pdf&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C6b541dd3ff3747fcab4708d8d27a46c0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637490770024381340%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=I0XZe4RUHP2kqc%2BrWFZYQJjS5nAk6%2FA7RtVAoX08T%2FM%3D&reserved=0>>, namely preferential ballots, counted with Instant Runoff Voting for the single Chair, and Scottish STV for the 2-3 Vice-Chairs. These methods are among the best ways to elect single and multiple winners for a group like UASG. I suggest adding between old #5 and #6, something like: "For the single Chair position, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices, and the counting method will be Instant Runoff Voting <https://www.opavote.com/methods/instant-runoff-voting<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.opavote.com%2Fmethods%2Finstant-runoff-voting&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C6b541dd3ff3747fcab4708d8d27a46c0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637490770024381340%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=OxAm1ZDSUf6WvRShiDo91ciX0y%2BMRAu1EJVE9iY49WI%3D&reserved=0>>", and "For the 2-3 Vice-Chair positions, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices among all candidates, and the counting method used will be Scottish STV <https://www.opavote.com/methods/single-transferable-vote#scottish-stv<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.opavote.com%2Fmethods%2Fsingle-transferable-vote%23scottish-stv&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C6b541dd3ff3747fcab4708d8d27a46c0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637490770024391334%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=ZZSpPDVR47o6r4v02ngotjsBBKPaT8Wb7U9h81naISg%3D&reserved=0>>."
3. The process does not define how we will decide whether to elect 2 or 3 Vice-Chairs. There are several rules which we could use. We should state what rule we will follow. I suggest adding it as part of the entry for the Vice-Chair method above. Some rules we could use:
1. If there are 1, 2, or 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they will all be elected by acclamation and they will not be voted on. 2. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on and 3 shall be elected.
3. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on, and an option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" shall be added to the ballot. Voters may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" the same way as any other candidate. The top two candidates shall be elected. If the option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" is among the top three finishers, there shall only be two Vice-Chairs, otherwise, there shall be three Vice-Chairs, and the third-place candidate shall also be elected. [Note: this curious option means that voters who think some candidates are unsatisfactory, and a Vice-Chair seat should be left empty rather than be filled by those candidates, may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" above the unsatisfactory candidates, and the counting will respect their wish to the extent possible.]
4. I have no problem with the diversity intent of rule # 4, but I think it is a mistake to enforce this at the nomination stage. Suppose there are two candidates in one organization, "M. Good" and "M. Bad". Rule #4 says that M. Bad can prevent voters from supporting M. Good by submitting their own self-nomination first! Instead I suggest that we implement the rule at the vote-counting stage of the Vice-Chair election. As soon as a candidate is elected during the counting process, we disqualify all other candidates from the same organization or company, and continue (or restart) the counting process. This lets voters, not nominators, choose whether to support "M. Good" or "M. Bad". There is no need for this diversity rule in the Chair election, because only one Chair is elected. I suggest a rule about eliminating Vice-Chair candidates during vote-counting be added, and old rule #4 be deleted.
5. Rule #1 does not clearly say that sock-puppets are forbidden. It should. By saying "the subscribers... are... the electorate", it implies that email addresses, not natural people, are the electorate. I suggest rewording it to say, "The electorate consists of the natural persons subscribed to the UA-Discuss mailing list on [the date of record for the electorate]. Each person may cast at most one ballot. Sock puppets are forbidden." 6. Rule #8 addresses sock puppets as well. Move it to right after rule #1.
7. Rule #1 (and the Election Timeline below) are not clear about the time at which the UASG-Discuss subscriber list creates the electorate. Rule #1 says "the date of announcing the election". But the Election Timeline puts the label "Announcing the starting of the elections" onto a 10-day period. I suggest adding a separate entry to the timeline, labelled something like "Date and time of record for the electorate". Make it a specific UTC time; dates (interpreted with time zones) can span 48 hours. 8. Rule #6 says the election process will be managed by a specialised elections service provider. Who? Why not just say Opavote? And it says, "the final results will be audited and confirmed." How? By whom?
9. I suggest adding a sentence to Rule #6. "A detailed report of the vote counting steps, along with anonymised raw ballot data, shall be published, for transparency and for community auditing." Opavote provides reports and ballot data as a normal part of its service.
Also, a few comments about the Election Timeline:
1. Dates without times or time zones are ambiguous in a global community. I suggest saying "all dates are UTC", or adding UTC times to each date.
2. The voting period should have times and time zones added; dates alone are too ambiguous. If the election starts at 00:00 5 March UTC and ends at 23:59 15 March UTC, that is 11 days, not 10. If it starts on 5 March anywhere in the world, and ends on 15 March anywhere in the world, that is 12 days (00:00 5 March UTC-13:00 to 23:59 15 March UTC+12:00). Only if the election period is defined as a specific time and time zone can it be unambiguously 10 days. The voting period in days should match the duration between start and end times.
3. Suggest adding a timeline entry, "Date and time of record for the electorate". I would recommend it being the same time as the self-nomination period begins, or when the list of candidates is announced. There's a risk of a candidate packing the UA-Discuss with their supporters. The choice of date and time of record can encourage or discourage this.
I hope this is helpful. Can you tell I am interested in electoral process?
Best regards,
-Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada
On 2021-02-04 12:37, Mohamed Elbashir wrote:
Dear UA Community,
Find attached the UASG 2021 elections process and timeline, it will be published on the UASG.tech website.
Thank you!
Best Regards,
Mohamed (Mo) Elbashir
Universal Acceptance (UA) Program Manager
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) One World, One Internet
[id:image001.png@01D356F4.3F3911B0]
_______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-discuss<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fua-discuss&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C6b541dd3ff3747fcab4708d8d27a46c0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637490770024391334%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=MiTh3%2BmS%2Bjrj2iH430gWF0iVu1a%2Fhprqp2c8l8JnnYw%3D&reserved=0> _______________________________________________ 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<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Fpolicy&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C6b541dd3ff3747fcab4708d8d27a46c0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637490770024401325%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=bXtqKt8WaUvewxrwiC0%2FRMVkbN%2Bwojf3%2FuSGpE7UW9o%3D&reserved=0>) and the website Terms of Service
(https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Ftos&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C6b541dd3ff3747fcab4708d8d27a46c0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637490770024401325%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=7INSJPkPN1yoXCzvY7aRHwngQUfmqHTHkMTqrKq3NLI%3D&reserved=0>). 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.
--. --Jim DeLaHunt, jdlh@jdlh.com<mailto:jdlh@jdlh.com> http://blog.jdlh.com/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.jdlh.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C6b541dd3ff3747fcab4708d8d27a46c0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637490770024411323%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=QKzdIu1hfDleoWYIAGBobRpKe5HoQchYVTZCrZTjhzg%3D&reserved=0> (http://jdlh.com/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fjdlh.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C6b541dd3ff3747fcab4708d8d27a46c0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637490770024411323%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=PjEwDo1mbcxoH2gZy2r1q5LFUj7axLOfo0i9ebbB2OU%3D&reserved=0>) multilingual websites consultant
2201-1000 Beach Ave, Vancouver BC V6E 4M2, Canada Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953
-- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.opera.com%2Fmail%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C6b541dd3ff3747fcab4708d8d27a46c0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637490770024421314%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=6ey%2FZagnZGp1CsNzaz0T61hQCbWVg7vgKX7PscoVVLE%3D&reserved=0> _______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-discuss<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fua-discuss&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C6b541dd3ff3747fcab4708d8d27a46c0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637490770024421314%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=mvCPa9MqeKhFtSpl1Ft1TXoUDFXT8FQfXOjXk2oalkQ%3D&reserved=0> _______________________________________________ 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<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Fpolicy&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C6b541dd3ff3747fcab4708d8d27a46c0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637490770024431308%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=aYmrtoN20HCRzP2uwU5RfLo3y3u4S3jR2QFcQGtopGs%3D&reserved=0>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Ftos&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C6b541dd3ff3747fcab4708d8d27a46c0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637490770024431308%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=ANHRhKajY9H8rb55AxLFOrwqk082JQ3hubkDhLSIVNU%3D&reserved=0>). 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.
-1 If candidate is not already known for his UA work, for me it is irrelevant what he have to say about how he and/or his org are advancing in UA. My two cents, Dusan From: UA-discuss [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mark Svancarek (CELA) via UA-discuss Sent: 16. фебруар 2021. 19:09 To: Mike Hemp <mikehamp1971@mail.com>; Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile <chaals@yandex.ru> Cc: ua-discuss@icann.org Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline +1 Mike – candidates SHOULD be able to describe how they and/or their organizations are advancing UA. From: UA-discuss <ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org <mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org> > On Behalf Of Mike Hemp Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 4:56 AM To: Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile <chaals@yandex.ru <mailto:chaals@yandex.ru> > Cc: ua-discuss@icann.org <mailto:ua-discuss@icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [UA-discuss] UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline Thank you Chaals , Jim, MO and everyone . Jim +1 change when needed. dont make us learn new proceses which are used once in two years. I ok for what has worked for us till now. more importantly, people in leadership should tell what they have done to execute UA implementation in the there own organisation-helped-moviated others. When they nominate they must mention this. We need people who are UA practitioners like people from Microsoft, Gmail, XgenPlus, Apple, Postfix and others. Best Mike Sent: Monday, February 08, 2021 at 11:47 AM From: "Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile" <chaals@yandex.ru <mailto:chaals@yandex.ru> > To: ua-discuss@icann.org <mailto:ua-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline Thank you Mo, Jim. I have a preference for Meek STV rather than Scottish STV, but I support all the suggestions Jim made - in particular his "curious option" to include allowing a vote for "only 2 vice-chairs". cheers Chaals On Sun, 07 Feb 2021 19:41:19 +1100, Jim DeLaHunt <list+uasg@jdlh.com <mailto:list+uasg@jdlh.com> > wrote:
Mo: Thank you for sending this out. It's good that we have a clearly stated election process, and that the process be clear before we add the specific candidates and opinions about which candidates to choose.
I have some suggestions about the elections process as stated in the document you sent, 2021 UASG Election Process and Timeline 2021-02-04.pdf , section "2021 UASG Election Process". 1. The process does not state that how many Chairs and how many Vice-Chairs are to be elected. Yes, the "UASG Structure" above says that these numbers are "1" and "2-3" respectively. Still, for clarity it seems good to state what the purpose of the process is. I suggest adding an item before old #1, reading something like, "The election will elect one Chair and [2-3 Vice-Chairs]".
2. The process does not state what kind of votes are cast and what method is used to count votes. I support using the same methods as last year, as described in <https://uasg.tech/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Call-for-Nominations.pdf <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fuasg.tech%...> >, namely preferential ballots, counted with Instant Runoff Voting for the single Chair, and Scottish STV for the 2-3 Vice-Chairs. These methods are among the best ways to elect single and multiple winners for a group like UASG. I suggest adding between old #5 and #6, something like: "For the single Chair position, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices, and the counting method will be Instant Runoff Voting <https://www.opavote.com/methods/instant-runoff-voting <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.opavot...> >", and "For the 2-3 Vice-Chair positions, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices among all candidates, and the counting method used will be Scottish STV <https://www.opavote.com/methods/single-transferable-vote#scottish-stv <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.opavot...> >."
3. The process does not define how we will decide whether to elect 2 or 3 Vice-Chairs. There are several rules which we could use. We should state what rule we will follow. I suggest adding it as part of the entry for the Vice-Chair method above. Some rules we could use:
1. If there are 1, 2, or 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they will all be elected by acclamation and they will not be voted on. 2. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on and 3 shall be elected.
3. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on, and an option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" shall be added to the ballot. Voters may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" the same way as any other candidate. The top two candidates shall be elected. If the option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" is among the top three finishers, there shall only be two Vice-Chairs, otherwise, there shall be three Vice-Chairs, and the third-place candidate shall also be elected. [Note: this curious option means that voters who think some candidates are unsatisfactory, and a Vice-Chair seat should be left empty rather than be filled by those candidates, may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" above the unsatisfactory candidates, and the counting will respect their wish to the extent possible.]
4. I have no problem with the diversity intent of rule # 4, but I think it is a mistake to enforce this at the nomination stage. Suppose there are two candidates in one organization, "M. Good" and "M. Bad". Rule #4 says that M. Bad can prevent voters from supporting M. Good by submitting their own self-nomination first! Instead I suggest that we implement the rule at the vote-counting stage of the Vice-Chair election. As soon as a candidate is elected during the counting process, we disqualify all other candidates from the same organization or company, and continue (or restart) the counting process. This lets voters, not nominators, choose whether to support "M. Good" or "M. Bad". There is no need for this diversity rule in the Chair election, because only one Chair is elected. I suggest a rule about eliminating Vice-Chair candidates during vote-counting be added, and old rule #4 be deleted.
5. Rule #1 does not clearly say that sock-puppets are forbidden. It should. By saying "the subscribers… are… the electorate", it implies that email addresses, not natural people, are the electorate. I suggest rewording it to say, "The electorate consists of the natural persons subscribed to the UA-Discuss mailing list on [the date of record for the electorate]. Each person may cast at most one ballot. Sock puppets are forbidden." 6. Rule #8 addresses sock puppets as well. Move it to right after rule #1.
7. Rule #1 (and the Election Timeline below) are not clear about the time at which the UASG-Discuss subscriber list creates the electorate. Rule #1 says "the date of announcing the election". But the Election Timeline puts the label "Announcing the starting of the elections" onto a 10-day period. I suggest adding a separate entry to the timeline, labelled something like "Date and time of record for the electorate". Make it a specific UTC time; dates (interpreted with time zones) can span 48 hours. 8. Rule #6 says the election process will be managed by a specialised elections service provider. Who? Why not just say Opavote? And it says, "the final results will be audited and confirmed." How? By whom?
9. I suggest adding a sentence to Rule #6. "A detailed report of the vote counting steps, along with anonymised raw ballot data, shall be published, for transparency and for community auditing." Opavote provides reports and ballot data as a normal part of its service.
Also, a few comments about the Election Timeline:
1. Dates without times or time zones are ambiguous in a global community. I suggest saying "all dates are UTC", or adding UTC times to each date.
2. The voting period should have times and time zones added; dates alone are too ambiguous. If the election starts at 00:00 5 March UTC and ends at 23:59 15 March UTC, that is 11 days, not 10. If it starts on 5 March anywhere in the world, and ends on 15 March anywhere in the world, that is 12 days (00:00 5 March UTC-13:00 to 23:59 15 March UTC+12:00). Only if the election period is defined as a specific time and time zone can it be unambiguously 10 days. The voting period in days should match the duration between start and end times.
3. Suggest adding a timeline entry, "Date and time of record for the electorate". I would recommend it being the same time as the self-nomination period begins, or when the list of candidates is announced. There's a risk of a candidate packing the UA-Discuss with their supporters. The choice of date and time of record can encourage or discourage this.
I hope this is helpful. Can you tell I am interested in electoral process?
Best regards,
—Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada
On 2021-02-04 12:37, Mohamed Elbashir wrote:
Dear UA Community,
Find attached the UASG 2021 elections process and timeline, it will be published on the UASG.tech website.
Thank you!
Best Regards,
Mohamed (Mo) Elbashir
Universal Acceptance (UA) Program Manager
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) One World, One Internet
[id:image001.png@01D356F4.3F3911B0]
_______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org <mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-discuss <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.o...> _______________________________________________ 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 <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann....> ) and the website Terms of Service
(https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann....> ). 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.
--. --Jim DeLaHunt, jdlh@jdlh.com <mailto:jdlh@jdlh.com> http://blog.jdlh.com/ <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.jdlh.c...> (http://jdlh.com/ <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fjdlh.com%2F...> ) multilingual websites consultant
2201-1000 Beach Ave, Vancouver BC V6E 4M2, Canada Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953
-- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.opera.c...> _______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org <mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-discuss <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.o...> _______________________________________________ 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 <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann....> ) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann....> ). 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. -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Also a good point! Voters should be active enough in the community to be informed about the bona fides of candidates. Otherwise they are casting an uninformed vote based on who-knows-what basis. Still – I think any materials provided to bolster a candidacy are helpful and good. From: Dušan Stojičević <dusan@dukes.in.rs> Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 11:17 AM To: Mark Svancarek (CELA) <marksv@microsoft.com>; 'Mike Hemp' <mikehamp1971@mail.com>; 'Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile' <chaals@yandex.ru> Cc: ua-discuss@icann.org Subject: RE: [UA-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline -1 If candidate is not already known for his UA work, for me it is irrelevant what he have to say about how he and/or his org are advancing in UA. My two cents, Dusan From: UA-discuss [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mark Svancarek (CELA) via UA-discuss Sent: 16. фебруар 2021. 19:09 To: Mike Hemp <mikehamp1971@mail.com<mailto:mikehamp1971@mail.com>>; Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile <chaals@yandex.ru<mailto:chaals@yandex.ru>> Cc: ua-discuss@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline +1 Mike – candidates SHOULD be able to describe how they and/or their organizations are advancing UA. From: UA-discuss <ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Mike Hemp Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 4:56 AM To: Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile <chaals@yandex.ru<mailto:chaals@yandex.ru>> Cc: ua-discuss@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss@icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [UA-discuss] UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline Thank you Chaals , Jim, MO and everyone . Jim +1 change when needed. dont make us learn new proceses which are used once in two years. I ok for what has worked for us till now. more importantly, people in leadership should tell what they have done to execute UA implementation in the there own organisation-helped-moviated others. When they nominate they must mention this. We need people who are UA practitioners like people from Microsoft, Gmail, XgenPlus, Apple, Postfix and others. Best Mike Sent: Monday, February 08, 2021 at 11:47 AM From: "Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile" <chaals@yandex.ru<mailto:chaals@yandex.ru>> To: ua-discuss@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline Thank you Mo, Jim. I have a preference for Meek STV rather than Scottish STV, but I support all the suggestions Jim made - in particular his "curious option" to include allowing a vote for "only 2 vice-chairs". cheers Chaals On Sun, 07 Feb 2021 19:41:19 +1100, Jim DeLaHunt <list+uasg@jdlh.com<mailto:list+uasg@jdlh.com>> wrote:
Mo: Thank you for sending this out. It's good that we have a clearly stated election process, and that the process be clear before we add the specific candidates and opinions about which candidates to choose.
I have some suggestions about the elections process as stated in the document you sent, 2021 UASG Election Process and Timeline 2021-02-04.pdf , section "2021 UASG Election Process". 1. The process does not state that how many Chairs and how many Vice-Chairs are to be elected. Yes, the "UASG Structure" above says that these numbers are "1" and "2-3" respectively. Still, for clarity it seems good to state what the purpose of the process is. I suggest adding an item before old #1, reading something like, "The election will elect one Chair and [2-3 Vice-Chairs]".
2. The process does not state what kind of votes are cast and what method is used to count votes. I support using the same methods as last year, as described in <https://uasg.tech/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Call-for-Nominations.pdf<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fuasg.tech%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F02%2FCall-for-Nominations.pdf&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800412606%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=oRNdejKflzrDv6jzD%2FbRaV%2FGH3lda3SIL7Al2l9dZ10%3D&reserved=0>>, namely preferential ballots, counted with Instant Runoff Voting for the single Chair, and Scottish STV for the 2-3 Vice-Chairs. These methods are among the best ways to elect single and multiple winners for a group like UASG. I suggest adding between old #5 and #6, something like: "For the single Chair position, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices, and the counting method will be Instant Runoff Voting <https://www.opavote.com/methods/instant-runoff-voting<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.opavote.com%2Fmethods%2Finstant-runoff-voting&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800412606%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=471MZlqU4kqm6oNJOwPtWVNjhlhV4TaXrNwJbChZ504%3D&reserved=0>>", and "For the 2-3 Vice-Chair positions, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices among all candidates, and the counting method used will be Scottish STV <https://www.opavote.com/methods/single-transferable-vote#scottish-stv<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.opavote.com%2Fmethods%2Fsingle-transferable-vote%23scottish-stv&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800422599%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=Lh2BvV5qOjSQluhjrYJqzKugmJ%2Fihm4cuXF5bh6xBRs%3D&reserved=0>>."
3. The process does not define how we will decide whether to elect 2 or 3 Vice-Chairs. There are several rules which we could use. We should state what rule we will follow. I suggest adding it as part of the entry for the Vice-Chair method above. Some rules we could use:
1. If there are 1, 2, or 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they will all be elected by acclamation and they will not be voted on. 2. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on and 3 shall be elected.
3. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on, and an option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" shall be added to the ballot. Voters may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" the same way as any other candidate. The top two candidates shall be elected. If the option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" is among the top three finishers, there shall only be two Vice-Chairs, otherwise, there shall be three Vice-Chairs, and the third-place candidate shall also be elected. [Note: this curious option means that voters who think some candidates are unsatisfactory, and a Vice-Chair seat should be left empty rather than be filled by those candidates, may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" above the unsatisfactory candidates, and the counting will respect their wish to the extent possible.]
4. I have no problem with the diversity intent of rule # 4, but I think it is a mistake to enforce this at the nomination stage. Suppose there are two candidates in one organization, "M. Good" and "M. Bad". Rule #4 says that M. Bad can prevent voters from supporting M. Good by submitting their own self-nomination first! Instead I suggest that we implement the rule at the vote-counting stage of the Vice-Chair election. As soon as a candidate is elected during the counting process, we disqualify all other candidates from the same organization or company, and continue (or restart) the counting process. This lets voters, not nominators, choose whether to support "M. Good" or "M. Bad". There is no need for this diversity rule in the Chair election, because only one Chair is elected. I suggest a rule about eliminating Vice-Chair candidates during vote-counting be added, and old rule #4 be deleted.
5. Rule #1 does not clearly say that sock-puppets are forbidden. It should. By saying "the subscribers… are… the electorate", it implies that email addresses, not natural people, are the electorate. I suggest rewording it to say, "The electorate consists of the natural persons subscribed to the UA-Discuss mailing list on [the date of record for the electorate]. Each person may cast at most one ballot. Sock puppets are forbidden." 6. Rule #8 addresses sock puppets as well. Move it to right after rule #1.
7. Rule #1 (and the Election Timeline below) are not clear about the time at which the UASG-Discuss subscriber list creates the electorate. Rule #1 says "the date of announcing the election". But the Election Timeline puts the label "Announcing the starting of the elections" onto a 10-day period. I suggest adding a separate entry to the timeline, labelled something like "Date and time of record for the electorate". Make it a specific UTC time; dates (interpreted with time zones) can span 48 hours. 8. Rule #6 says the election process will be managed by a specialised elections service provider. Who? Why not just say Opavote? And it says, "the final results will be audited and confirmed." How? By whom?
9. I suggest adding a sentence to Rule #6. "A detailed report of the vote counting steps, along with anonymised raw ballot data, shall be published, for transparency and for community auditing." Opavote provides reports and ballot data as a normal part of its service.
Also, a few comments about the Election Timeline:
1. Dates without times or time zones are ambiguous in a global community. I suggest saying "all dates are UTC", or adding UTC times to each date.
2. The voting period should have times and time zones added; dates alone are too ambiguous. If the election starts at 00:00 5 March UTC and ends at 23:59 15 March UTC, that is 11 days, not 10. If it starts on 5 March anywhere in the world, and ends on 15 March anywhere in the world, that is 12 days (00:00 5 March UTC-13:00 to 23:59 15 March UTC+12:00). Only if the election period is defined as a specific time and time zone can it be unambiguously 10 days. The voting period in days should match the duration between start and end times.
3. Suggest adding a timeline entry, "Date and time of record for the electorate". I would recommend it being the same time as the self-nomination period begins, or when the list of candidates is announced. There's a risk of a candidate packing the UA-Discuss with their supporters. The choice of date and time of record can encourage or discourage this.
I hope this is helpful. Can you tell I am interested in electoral process?
Best regards,
—Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada
On 2021-02-04 12:37, Mohamed Elbashir wrote:
Dear UA Community,
Find attached the UASG 2021 elections process and timeline, it will be published on the UASG.tech website.
Thank you!
Best Regards,
Mohamed (Mo) Elbashir
Universal Acceptance (UA) Program Manager
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) One World, One Internet
[id:image001.png@01D356F4.3F3911B0]
_______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-discuss<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fua-discuss&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800422599%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=pHLUtqYAOr2poRV5FdsSN6tpNa0KlBo0ytD7QmFpl0g%3D&reserved=0> _______________________________________________ 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<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Fpolicy&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800432596%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=87YPwA4%2B9RhFqig76bdMXUNC%2B%2FZOpY8JPzBmbp3Xo4c%3D&reserved=0>) and the website Terms of Service
(https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Ftos&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800442591%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=qGk3xqShcDwiK4HAUbFYRPmqipjrGbj%2Bb2sLJCu%2FWWk%3D&reserved=0>). 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.
--. --Jim DeLaHunt, jdlh@jdlh.com<mailto:jdlh@jdlh.com> http://blog.jdlh.com/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.jdlh.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800442591%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=Z9cNXfTZGLKlCefIKwst7gmhagvILXr%2FjLAgCX9aJvg%3D&reserved=0> (http://jdlh.com/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fjdlh.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800452582%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=c1rnTrPSMNoNbJ1dpTY25wVgFX6xbDlm%2B3QkfakN9eE%3D&reserved=0>) multilingual websites consultant
2201-1000 Beach Ave, Vancouver BC V6E 4M2, Canada Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953
-- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.opera.com%2Fmail%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800452582%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=cHTrxh5Gl1u9g4aURjtnc%2BPR3itpF1ZvB9AWIEhbZ7Q%3D&reserved=0> _______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-discuss<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fua-discuss&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800462580%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=23A1BmxOC4B7RIugLaVEAJJiGPDr4TVGeVyW441HXio%3D&reserved=0> _______________________________________________ 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<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Fpolicy&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800462580%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=u6JOTEFZ1KD6ZD8uTZdBFJaswajjBioYVilVKX%2BSQ7M%3D&reserved=0>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Ftos&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800472574%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=5WdDlyUbwf53BrW1pgm9h0ccNBV8ASsUDruY9Lge7wA%3D&reserved=0>). 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. [https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif]<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.avast.com%2Fsig-email%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dlink%26utm_campaign%3Dsig-email%26utm_content%3Demailclient&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800482568%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=Uxt58%2FxpZ7AKcvy4FDajHbfK%2FFeGPxBtP5VhzvlIMTg%3D&reserved=0> Virus-free. www.avast.com<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.avast....>
Who is being given a ballot? Any email registered on the list? On 02/17/2021 17:28, Mark Svancarek (CELA) via UA-discuss wrote:
Also a good point! Voters should be active enough in the community to be informed about the bona fides of candidates. Otherwise they are casting an uninformed vote based on who-knows-what basis.
Still – I think any materials provided to bolster a candidacy are helpful and good.
*From:* Dušan Stojičević <dusan@dukes.in.rs> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 17, 2021 11:17 AM *To:* Mark Svancarek (CELA) <marksv@microsoft.com>; 'Mike Hemp' <mikehamp1971@mail.com>; 'Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile' <chaals@yandex.ru> *Cc:* ua-discuss@icann.org *Subject:* RE: [UA-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline
-1
If candidate is not already known for his UA work, for me it is irrelevant what he have to say about how he and/or his org are advancing in UA.
My two cents,
Dusan
*From:* UA-discuss [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org <mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Mark Svancarek (CELA) via UA-discuss *Sent:* 16. фебруар 2021. 19:09 *To:* Mike Hemp <mikehamp1971@mail.com <mailto:mikehamp1971@mail.com>>; Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile <chaals@yandex.ru <mailto:chaals@yandex.ru>> *Cc:* ua-discuss@icann.org <mailto:ua-discuss@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [UA-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline
+1 Mike – candidates SHOULD be able to describe how they and/or their organizations are advancing UA.
*From:* UA-discuss <ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org <mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org>> *On Behalf Of *Mike Hemp *Sent:* Tuesday, February 16, 2021 4:56 AM *To:* Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile <chaals@yandex.ru <mailto:chaals@yandex.ru>> *Cc:* ua-discuss@icann.org <mailto:ua-discuss@icann.org> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [UA-discuss] UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline
Thank you Chaals , Jim, MO and everyone .
Jim +1
change when needed. dont make us learn new proceses which are used once in two years. I ok for what has worked for us till now.
more importantly, people in leadership should tell what they have done to execute UA implementation in the there own organisation-helped-moviated others. When they nominate they must mention this. We need people who are UA practitioners like people from Microsoft, Gmail, XgenPlus, Apple, Postfix and others.
Best
Mike
*Sent:* Monday, February 08, 2021 at 11:47 AM *From:* "Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile" <chaals@yandex.ru <mailto:chaals@yandex.ru>> *To:* ua-discuss@icann.org <mailto:ua-discuss@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [UA-discuss] UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline
Thank you Mo, Jim.
I have a preference for Meek STV rather than Scottish STV, but I support all the suggestions Jim made - in particular his "curious option" to include allowing a vote for "only 2 vice-chairs".
cheers
Chaals
On Sun, 07 Feb 2021 19:41:19 +1100, Jim DeLaHunt <list+uasg@jdlh.com <mailto:list+uasg@jdlh.com>> wrote:
Mo: Thank you for sending this out. It's good that we have a clearly stated election process, and that the process be clear before we add the specific candidates and opinions about which candidates to choose.
I have some suggestions about the elections process as stated in the document you sent, 2021 UASG Election Process and Timeline 2021-02-04.pdf , section "2021 UASG Election Process". 1. The process does not state that how many Chairs and how many Vice-Chairs are to be elected. Yes, the "UASG Structure" above says that these numbers are "1" and "2-3" respectively. Still, for clarity it seems good to state what the purpose of the process is. I suggest adding an item before old #1, reading something like, "The election will elect one Chair and [2-3 Vice-Chairs]".
2. The process does not state what kind of votes are cast and what method is used to count votes. I support using the same methods as last year, as described in
<https://uasg.tech/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Call-for-Nominations.pdf <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fuasg.tech%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F02%2FCall-for-Nominations.pdf&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800412606%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=oRNdejKflzrDv6jzD%2FbRaV%2FGH3lda3SIL7Al2l9dZ10%3D&reserved=0>>,
namely preferential ballots, counted with Instant Runoff Voting for the single Chair, and Scottish STV for the 2-3 Vice-Chairs. These methods are among the best ways to elect single and multiple winners for a group like UASG. I suggest adding between old #5 and #6, something like: "For the single Chair position, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices, and the counting method will be Instant Runoff Voting <https://www.opavote.com/methods/instant-runoff-voting <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.opavote.com%2Fmethods%2Finstant-runoff-voting&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800412606%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=471MZlqU4kqm6oNJOwPtWVNjhlhV4TaXrNwJbChZ504%3D&reserved=0>>", and "For the 2-3 Vice-Chair positions, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices among all candidates, and the counting method used will be Scottish STV
<https://www.opavote.com/methods/single-transferable-vote#scottish-stv <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.opavote.com%2Fmethods%2Fsingle-transferable-vote%23scottish-stv&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800422599%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=Lh2BvV5qOjSQluhjrYJqzKugmJ%2Fihm4cuXF5bh6xBRs%3D&reserved=0>>."
3. The process does not define how we will decide whether to elect 2 or 3 Vice-Chairs. There are several rules which we could use. We should state what rule we will follow. I suggest adding it as part of the entry for the Vice-Chair method above. Some rules we could use:
1. If there are 1, 2, or 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they will all be elected by acclamation and they will not be voted on. 2. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on and 3 shall be elected.
3. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on, and an option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" shall be added to the ballot. Voters may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" the same way as any other candidate. The top two candidates shall be elected. If the option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" is among the top three finishers, there shall only be two Vice-Chairs, otherwise, there shall be three Vice-Chairs, and the third-place candidate shall also be elected. [Note: this curious option means that voters who think some candidates are unsatisfactory, and a Vice-Chair seat should be left empty rather than be filled by those candidates, may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" above the unsatisfactory candidates, and the counting will respect their wish to the extent possible.]
4. I have no problem with the diversity intent of rule # 4, but I think it is a mistake to enforce this at the nomination stage. Suppose there are two candidates in one organization, "M. Good" and "M. Bad". Rule #4 says that M. Bad can prevent voters from supporting M. Good by submitting their own self-nomination first! Instead I suggest that we implement the rule at the vote-counting stage of the Vice-Chair election. As soon as a candidate is elected during the counting process, we disqualify all other candidates from the same organization or company, and continue (or restart) the counting process. This lets voters, not nominators, choose whether to support "M. Good" or "M. Bad". There is no need for this diversity rule in the Chair election, because only one Chair is elected. I suggest a rule about eliminating Vice-Chair candidates during vote-counting be added, and old rule #4 be deleted.
5. Rule #1 does not clearly say that sock-puppets are forbidden. It should. By saying "the subscribers… are… the electorate", it implies that email addresses, not natural people, are the electorate. I suggest rewording it to say, "The electorate consists of the natural persons subscribed to the UA-Discuss mailing list on [the date of record for the electorate]. Each person may cast at most one ballot. Sock puppets are forbidden." 6. Rule #8 addresses sock puppets as well. Move it to right after rule #1.
7. Rule #1 (and the Election Timeline below) are not clear about the time at which the UASG-Discuss subscriber list creates the electorate. Rule #1 says "the date of announcing the election". But the Election Timeline puts the label "Announcing the starting of the elections" onto a 10-day period. I suggest adding a separate entry to the timeline, labelled something like "Date and time of record for the electorate". Make it a specific UTC time; dates (interpreted with time zones) can span 48 hours. 8. Rule #6 says the election process will be managed by a specialised elections service provider. Who? Why not just say Opavote? And it says, "the final results will be audited and confirmed." How? By whom?
9. I suggest adding a sentence to Rule #6. "A detailed report of the vote counting steps, along with anonymised raw ballot data, shall be published, for transparency and for community auditing." Opavote provides reports and ballot data as a normal part of its service.
Also, a few comments about the Election Timeline:
1. Dates without times or time zones are ambiguous in a global community. I suggest saying "all dates are UTC", or adding UTC times to each date.
2. The voting period should have times and time zones added; dates alone are too ambiguous. If the election starts at 00:00 5 March UTC and ends at 23:59 15 March UTC, that is 11 days, not 10. If it starts on 5 March anywhere in the world, and ends on 15 March anywhere in the world, that is 12 days (00:00 5 March UTC-13:00 to 23:59 15 March UTC+12:00). Only if the election period is defined as a specific time and time zone can it be unambiguously 10 days. The voting period in days should match the duration between start and end times.
3. Suggest adding a timeline entry, "Date and time of record for the electorate". I would recommend it being the same time as the self-nomination period begins, or when the list of candidates is announced. There's a risk of a candidate packing the UA-Discuss with their supporters. The choice of date and time of record can encourage or discourage this.
I hope this is helpful. Can you tell I am interested in electoral process?
Best regards,
—Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada
On 2021-02-04 12:37, Mohamed Elbashir wrote:
Dear UA Community,
Find attached the UASG 2021 elections process and timeline, it will be published on the UASG.tech website.
Thank you!
Best Regards,
Mohamed (Mo) Elbashir
Universal Acceptance (UA) Program Manager
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) One World, One Internet
[id:image001.png@01D356F4.3F3911B0 <id:image001.png@01D356F4.3F3911B0>]
_______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org <mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-discuss
<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.o...>
_______________________________________________ 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 <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann....>) and the website Terms of Service
(https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann....>). 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.
--. --Jim DeLaHunt, jdlh@jdlh.com <mailto:jdlh@jdlh.com> http://blog.jdlh.com/ <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.jdlh.c...> (http://jdlh.com/ <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fjdlh.com%2F...>) multilingual websites consultant
2201-1000 Beach Ave, Vancouver BC V6E 4M2, Canada Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953
-- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.opera.c...> _______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org <mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-discuss <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.o...> _______________________________________________ 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 <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann....>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann....>). 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.
<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.avast....>
Virus-free. www.avast.com <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.avast....>
_______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-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.
-- Mark W. Datysgeld from Governance Primer [www.markwd.website] ICANN GNSO Councilor
Dear Mark, The previous UASG elections processes indicate the following references regarding the voters: * “Electors will come from subscribers to the UA-Discuss mailing list” * “Voting papers will be distributed electronically to the members of the UA-Discuss list ……” https://uasg.tech/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/07-Election-Proposed-Process-An... The UASG 2021 election process as well indicate the following: “The eligible voters will be the subscribers of the UA-Discuss mailing list on the date of announcing the election, any new subscribers joining after the election announcement date will not participate in the voting process.” Thanks! Best Regards, Mohamed From: UA-discuss <ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Mark Datysgeld <mark@governanceprimer.com> Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 at 4:34 PM To: "Mark Svancarek (CELA)" <marksv@microsoft.com>, Dušan Stojičević <dusan@dukes.in.rs>, 'Mike Hemp' <mikehamp1971@mail.com>, "'Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile'" <chaals@yandex.ru> Cc: "ua-discuss@icann.org" <ua-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline Who is being given a ballot? Any email registered on the list? On 02/17/2021 17:28, Mark Svancarek (CELA) via UA-discuss wrote: Also a good point! Voters should be active enough in the community to be informed about the bona fides of candidates. Otherwise they are casting an uninformed vote based on who-knows-what basis. Still – I think any materials provided to bolster a candidacy are helpful and good. From: Dušan Stojičević <dusan@dukes.in.rs><mailto:dusan@dukes.in.rs> Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 11:17 AM To: Mark Svancarek (CELA) <marksv@microsoft.com><mailto:marksv@microsoft.com>; 'Mike Hemp' <mikehamp1971@mail.com><mailto:mikehamp1971@mail.com>; 'Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile' <chaals@yandex.ru><mailto:chaals@yandex.ru> Cc: ua-discuss@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss@icann.org> Subject: RE: [UA-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline -1 If candidate is not already known for his UA work, for me it is irrelevant what he have to say about how he and/or his org are advancing in UA. My two cents, Dusan From: UA-discuss [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mark Svancarek (CELA) via UA-discuss Sent: 16. фебруар 2021. 19:09 To: Mike Hemp <mikehamp1971@mail.com<mailto:mikehamp1971@mail.com>>; Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile <chaals@yandex.ru<mailto:chaals@yandex.ru>> Cc: ua-discuss@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline +1 Mike – candidates SHOULD be able to describe how they and/or their organizations are advancing UA. From: UA-discuss <ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Mike Hemp Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 4:56 AM To: Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile <chaals@yandex.ru<mailto:chaals@yandex.ru>> Cc: ua-discuss@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss@icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [UA-discuss] UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline Thank you Chaals , Jim, MO and everyone . Jim +1 change when needed. dont make us learn new proceses which are used once in two years. I ok for what has worked for us till now. more importantly, people in leadership should tell what they have done to execute UA implementation in the there own organisation-helped-moviated others. When they nominate they must mention this. We need people who are UA practitioners like people from Microsoft, Gmail, XgenPlus, Apple, Postfix and others. Best Mike Sent: Monday, February 08, 2021 at 11:47 AM From: "Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile" <chaals@yandex.ru<mailto:chaals@yandex.ru>> To: ua-discuss@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] UASG 2021 Elections - Process and Timeline Thank you Mo, Jim. I have a preference for Meek STV rather than Scottish STV, but I support all the suggestions Jim made - in particular his "curious option" to include allowing a vote for "only 2 vice-chairs". cheers Chaals On Sun, 07 Feb 2021 19:41:19 +1100, Jim DeLaHunt <list+uasg@jdlh.com<mailto:list+uasg@jdlh.com>> wrote:
Mo: Thank you for sending this out. It's good that we have a clearly stated election process, and that the process be clear before we add the specific candidates and opinions about which candidates to choose.
I have some suggestions about the elections process as stated in the document you sent, 2021 UASG Election Process and Timeline 2021-02-04.pdf , section "2021 UASG Election Process". 1. The process does not state that how many Chairs and how many Vice-Chairs are to be elected. Yes, the "UASG Structure" above says that these numbers are "1" and "2-3" respectively. Still, for clarity it seems good to state what the purpose of the process is. I suggest adding an item before old #1, reading something like, "The election will elect one Chair and [2-3 Vice-Chairs]".
2. The process does not state what kind of votes are cast and what method is used to count votes. I support using the same methods as last year, as described in <https://uasg.tech/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Call-for-Nominations.pdf<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fuasg.tech%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F02%2FCall-for-Nominations.pdf&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800412606%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=oRNdejKflzrDv6jzD%2FbRaV%2FGH3lda3SIL7Al2l9dZ10%3D&reserved=0>>, namely preferential ballots, counted with Instant Runoff Voting for the single Chair, and Scottish STV for the 2-3 Vice-Chairs. These methods are among the best ways to elect single and multiple winners for a group like UASG. I suggest adding between old #5 and #6, something like: "For the single Chair position, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices, and the counting method will be Instant Runoff Voting <https://www.opavote.com/methods/instant-runoff-voting<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.opavote.com%2Fmethods%2Finstant-runoff-voting&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800412606%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=471MZlqU4kqm6oNJOwPtWVNjhlhV4TaXrNwJbChZ504%3D&reserved=0>>", and "For the 2-3 Vice-Chair positions, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices among all candidates, and the counting method used will be Scottish STV <https://www.opavote.com/methods/single-transferable-vote#scottish-stv<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.opavote.com%2Fmethods%2Fsingle-transferable-vote%23scottish-stv&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800422599%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=Lh2BvV5qOjSQluhjrYJqzKugmJ%2Fihm4cuXF5bh6xBRs%3D&reserved=0>>."
3. The process does not define how we will decide whether to elect 2 or 3 Vice-Chairs. There are several rules which we could use. We should state what rule we will follow. I suggest adding it as part of the entry for the Vice-Chair method above. Some rules we could use:
1. If there are 1, 2, or 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they will all be elected by acclamation and they will not be voted on. 2. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on and 3 shall be elected.
3. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on, and an option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" shall be added to the ballot. Voters may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" the same way as any other candidate. The top two candidates shall be elected. If the option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" is among the top three finishers, there shall only be two Vice-Chairs, otherwise, there shall be three Vice-Chairs, and the third-place candidate shall also be elected. [Note: this curious option means that voters who think some candidates are unsatisfactory, and a Vice-Chair seat should be left empty rather than be filled by those candidates, may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" above the unsatisfactory candidates, and the counting will respect their wish to the extent possible.]
4. I have no problem with the diversity intent of rule # 4, but I think it is a mistake to enforce this at the nomination stage. Suppose there are two candidates in one organization, "M. Good" and "M. Bad". Rule #4 says that M. Bad can prevent voters from supporting M. Good by submitting their own self-nomination first! Instead I suggest that we implement the rule at the vote-counting stage of the Vice-Chair election. As soon as a candidate is elected during the counting process, we disqualify all other candidates from the same organization or company, and continue (or restart) the counting process. This lets voters, not nominators, choose whether to support "M. Good" or "M. Bad". There is no need for this diversity rule in the Chair election, because only one Chair is elected. I suggest a rule about eliminating Vice-Chair candidates during vote-counting be added, and old rule #4 be deleted.
5. Rule #1 does not clearly say that sock-puppets are forbidden. It should. By saying "the subscribers… are… the electorate", it implies that email addresses, not natural people, are the electorate. I suggest rewording it to say, "The electorate consists of the natural persons subscribed to the UA-Discuss mailing list on [the date of record for the electorate]. Each person may cast at most one ballot. Sock puppets are forbidden." 6. Rule #8 addresses sock puppets as well. Move it to right after rule #1.
7. Rule #1 (and the Election Timeline below) are not clear about the time at which the UASG-Discuss subscriber list creates the electorate. Rule #1 says "the date of announcing the election". But the Election Timeline puts the label "Announcing the starting of the elections" onto a 10-day period. I suggest adding a separate entry to the timeline, labelled something like "Date and time of record for the electorate". Make it a specific UTC time; dates (interpreted with time zones) can span 48 hours. 8. Rule #6 says the election process will be managed by a specialised elections service provider. Who? Why not just say Opavote? And it says, "the final results will be audited and confirmed." How? By whom?
9. I suggest adding a sentence to Rule #6. "A detailed report of the vote counting steps, along with anonymised raw ballot data, shall be published, for transparency and for community auditing." Opavote provides reports and ballot data as a normal part of its service.
Also, a few comments about the Election Timeline:
1. Dates without times or time zones are ambiguous in a global community. I suggest saying "all dates are UTC", or adding UTC times to each date.
2. The voting period should have times and time zones added; dates alone are too ambiguous. If the election starts at 00:00 5 March UTC and ends at 23:59 15 March UTC, that is 11 days, not 10. If it starts on 5 March anywhere in the world, and ends on 15 March anywhere in the world, that is 12 days (00:00 5 March UTC-13:00 to 23:59 15 March UTC+12:00). Only if the election period is defined as a specific time and time zone can it be unambiguously 10 days. The voting period in days should match the duration between start and end times.
3. Suggest adding a timeline entry, "Date and time of record for the electorate". I would recommend it being the same time as the self-nomination period begins, or when the list of candidates is announced. There's a risk of a candidate packing the UA-Discuss with their supporters. The choice of date and time of record can encourage or discourage this.
I hope this is helpful. Can you tell I am interested in electoral process?
Best regards,
—Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada
On 2021-02-04 12:37, Mohamed Elbashir wrote:
Dear UA Community,
Find attached the UASG 2021 elections process and timeline, it will be published on the UASG.tech website.
Thank you!
Best Regards,
Mohamed (Mo) Elbashir
Universal Acceptance (UA) Program Manager
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) One World, One Internet
[id:image001.png@01D356F4.3F3911B0]
_______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-discuss<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fua-discuss&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800422599%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=pHLUtqYAOr2poRV5FdsSN6tpNa0KlBo0ytD7QmFpl0g%3D&reserved=0> _______________________________________________ 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<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Fpolicy&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800432596%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=87YPwA4%2B9RhFqig76bdMXUNC%2B%2FZOpY8JPzBmbp3Xo4c%3D&reserved=0>) and the website Terms of Service
(https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Ftos&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800442591%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=qGk3xqShcDwiK4HAUbFYRPmqipjrGbj%2Bb2sLJCu%2FWWk%3D&reserved=0>). 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.
--. --Jim DeLaHunt, jdlh@jdlh.com<mailto:jdlh@jdlh.com> http://blog.jdlh.com/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.jdlh.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800442591%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=Z9cNXfTZGLKlCefIKwst7gmhagvILXr%2FjLAgCX9aJvg%3D&reserved=0> (http://jdlh.com/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fjdlh.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800452582%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=c1rnTrPSMNoNbJ1dpTY25wVgFX6xbDlm%2B3QkfakN9eE%3D&reserved=0>) multilingual websites consultant
2201-1000 Beach Ave, Vancouver BC V6E 4M2, Canada Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953
-- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.opera.com%2Fmail%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800452582%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=cHTrxh5Gl1u9g4aURjtnc%2BPR3itpF1ZvB9AWIEhbZ7Q%3D&reserved=0> _______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-discuss<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fua-discuss&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800462580%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=23A1BmxOC4B7RIugLaVEAJJiGPDr4TVGeVyW441HXio%3D&reserved=0> _______________________________________________ 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<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Fpolicy&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800462580%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=u6JOTEFZ1KD6ZD8uTZdBFJaswajjBioYVilVKX%2BSQ7M%3D&reserved=0>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Ftos&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C959ed45bed5343d69e5b08d8d3789276%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637491864800472574%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=5WdDlyUbwf53BrW1pgm9h0ccNBV8ASsUDruY9Lge7wA%3D&reserved=0>). 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. [Image removed by sender.]<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.avast....> Virus-free. www.avast.com<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.avast....> _______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-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. -- Mark W. Datysgeld from Governance Primer [www.markwd.website<http://www.markwd.website>] ICANN GNSO Councilor
Chaals:
…I support all the suggestions Jim made…
Thank you!
…I have a preference for Meek STV rather than Scottish STV…
Yes, so do I. But the published Election Process did not mention any counting method at all, so my first priority is to get the Election Process to be clear that we will use some form of Single Transferable Vote (STV) over other, less satisfactory, methods of counting. The published method last time was Scottish STV, so the baseline is that we use the same method as last election. But yes, there are many varieties of Single Transferable Vote, each with their details. Some are slightly better than others for our purposes. If we can choose among varieties of STV, I'm happy to have that discussion. But first, let's be clear that we are using STV rather than not-STV. Best regards, —Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada On 2021-02-07 22:17, Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile wrote:
Thank you Mo, Jim.
I have a preference for Meek STV rather than Scottish STV, but I support all the suggestions Jim made - in particular his "curious option" to include allowing a vote for "only 2 vice-chairs".
cheers
Chaals
On Sun, 07 Feb 2021 19:41:19 +1100, Jim DeLaHunt <list+uasg@jdlh.com> wrote:
Mo: Thank you for sending this out. It's good that we have a clearly stated election process, and that the process be clear before we add the specific candidates and opinions about which candidates to choose.
I have some suggestions about the elections process as stated in the document you sent, 2021 UASG Election Process and Timeline 2021-02-04.pdf , section "2021 UASG Election Process". 1. The process does not state that how many Chairs and how many Vice-Chairs are to be elected. Yes, the "UASG Structure" above says that these numbers are "1" and "2-3" respectively. Still, for clarity it seems good to state what the purpose of the process is. I suggest adding an item before old #1, reading something like, "The election will elect one Chair and [2-3 Vice-Chairs]".
2. The process does not state what kind of votes are cast and what method is used to count votes. I support using the same methods as last year, as described in <https://uasg.tech/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Call-for-Nominations.pdf>, namely preferential ballots, counted with Instant Runoff Voting for the single Chair, and Scottish STV for the 2-3 Vice-Chairs. These methods are among the best ways to elect single and multiple winners for a group like UASG. I suggest adding between old #5 and #6, something like: "For the single Chair position, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices, and the counting method will be Instant Runoff Voting <https://www.opavote.com/methods/instant-runoff-voting>", and "For the 2-3 Vice-Chair positions, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices among all candidates, and the counting method used will be Scottish STV <https://www.opavote.com/methods/single-transferable-vote#scottish-stv>."
3. The process does not define how we will decide whether to elect 2 or 3 Vice-Chairs. There are several rules which we could use. We should state what rule we will follow. I suggest adding it as part of the entry for the Vice-Chair method above. Some rules we could use:
1. If there are 1, 2, or 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they will all be elected by acclamation and they will not be voted on. 2. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on and 3 shall be elected.
3. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on, and an option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" shall be added to the ballot. Voters may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" the same way as any other candidate. The top two candidates shall be elected. If the option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" is among the top three finishers, there shall only be two Vice-Chairs, otherwise, there shall be three Vice-Chairs, and the third-place candidate shall also be elected. [Note: this curious option means that voters who think some candidates are unsatisfactory, and a Vice-Chair seat should be left empty rather than be filled by those candidates, may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" above the unsatisfactory candidates, and the counting will respect their wish to the extent possible.]
4. I have no problem with the diversity intent of rule # 4, but I think it is a mistake to enforce this at the nomination stage. Suppose there are two candidates in one organization, "M. Good" and "M. Bad". Rule #4 says that M. Bad can prevent voters from supporting M. Good by submitting their own self-nomination first! Instead I suggest that we implement the rule at the vote-counting stage of the Vice-Chair election. As soon as a candidate is elected during the counting process, we disqualify all other candidates from the same organization or company, and continue (or restart) the counting process. This lets voters, not nominators, choose whether to support "M. Good" or "M. Bad". There is no need for this diversity rule in the Chair election, because only one Chair is elected. I suggest a rule about eliminating Vice-Chair candidates during vote-counting be added, and old rule #4 be deleted.
5. Rule #1 does not clearly say that sock-puppets are forbidden. It should. By saying "the subscribers… are… the electorate", it implies that email addresses, not natural people, are the electorate. I suggest rewording it to say, "The electorate consists of the natural persons subscribed to the UA-Discuss mailing list on [the date of record for the electorate]. Each person may cast at most one ballot. Sock puppets are forbidden." 6. Rule #8 addresses sock puppets as well. Move it to right after rule #1.
7. Rule #1 (and the Election Timeline below) are not clear about the time at which the UASG-Discuss subscriber list creates the electorate. Rule #1 says "the date of announcing the election". But the Election Timeline puts the label "Announcing the starting of the elections" onto a 10-day period. I suggest adding a separate entry to the timeline, labelled something like "Date and time of record for the electorate". Make it a specific UTC time; dates (interpreted with time zones) can span 48 hours. 8. Rule #6 says the election process will be managed by a specialised elections service provider. Who? Why not just say Opavote? And it says, "the final results will be audited and confirmed." How? By whom?
9. I suggest adding a sentence to Rule #6. "A detailed report of the vote counting steps, along with anonymised raw ballot data, shall be published, for transparency and for community auditing." Opavote provides reports and ballot data as a normal part of its service.
Also, a few comments about the Election Timeline:
1. Dates without times or time zones are ambiguous in a global community. I suggest saying "all dates are UTC", or adding UTC times to each date.
2. The voting period should have times and time zones added; dates alone are too ambiguous. If the election starts at 00:00 5 March UTC and ends at 23:59 15 March UTC, that is 11 days, not 10. If it starts on 5 March anywhere in the world, and ends on 15 March anywhere in the world, that is 12 days (00:00 5 March UTC-13:00 to 23:59 15 March UTC+12:00). Only if the election period is defined as a specific time and time zone can it be unambiguously 10 days. The voting period in days should match the duration between start and end times.
3. Suggest adding a timeline entry, "Date and time of record for the electorate". I would recommend it being the same time as the self-nomination period begins, or when the list of candidates is announced. There's a risk of a candidate packing the UA-Discuss with their supporters. The choice of date and time of record can encourage or discourage this.
I hope this is helpful. Can you tell I am interested in electoral process?
Best regards,
—Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada
On 2021-02-04 12:37, Mohamed Elbashir wrote:
Dear UA Community,
Find attached the UASG 2021 elections process and timeline, it will be published on the UASG.tech website.
Thank you!
Best Regards,
Mohamed (Mo) Elbashir
Universal Acceptance (UA) Program Manager
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) One World, One Internet
[id:image001.png@01D356F4.3F3911B0]
_______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-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.
--. --Jim DeLaHunt, jdlh@jdlh.com http://blog.jdlh.com/ (http://jdlh.com/) multilingual websites consultant
2201-1000 Beach Ave, Vancouver BC V6E 4M2, Canada Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953
-- . --Jim DeLaHunt, jdlh@jdlh.com http://blog.jdlh.com/ (http://jdlh.com/) multilingual websites consultant 2201-1000 Beach Ave, Vancouver BC V6E 4M2, Canada Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953
Agreed. Cheers On Sun, 21 Feb 2021 20:16:18 +1100, Jim DeLaHunt via UA-discuss <ua-discuss@icann.org> wrote:
Chaals:
…I support all the suggestions Jim made…
Thank you!
…I have a preference for Meek STV rather than Scottish STV…
Yes, so do I. But the published Election Process did not mention any counting method at all, so my first priority is to get the Election Process to be clear that we will use some form of Single Transferable Vote (STV) over other, less satisfactory, methods of counting. The published method last time was Scottish STV, so the baseline is that we use the same method as last election.
But yes, there are many varieties of Single Transferable Vote, each with their details. Some are slightly better than others for our purposes. If we can choose among varieties of STV, I'm happy to have that discussion. But first, let's be clear that we are using STV rather than not-STV.
Best regards, —Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada
On 2021-02-07 22:17, Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile wrote:
Thank you Mo, Jim.
I have a preference for Meek STV rather than Scottish STV, but I support all the suggestions Jim made - in particular his "curious option" to include allowing a vote for "only 2 vice-chairs".
cheers
Chaals
On Sun, 07 Feb 2021 19:41:19 +1100, Jim DeLaHunt <list+uasg@jdlh.com> wrote:
Mo: Thank you for sending this out. It's good that we have a clearly stated election process, and that the process be clear before we add the specific candidates and opinions about which candidates to choose.
I have some suggestions about the elections process as stated in the document you sent, 2021 UASG Election Process and Timeline 2021-02-04.pdf , section "2021 UASG Election Process". 1. The process does not state that how many Chairs and how many Vice-Chairs are to be elected. Yes, the "UASG Structure" above says that these numbers are "1" and "2-3" respectively. Still, for clarity it seems good to state what the purpose of the process is. I suggest adding an item before old #1, reading something like, "The election will elect one Chair and [2-3 Vice-Chairs]".
2. The process does not state what kind of votes are cast and what method is used to count votes. I support using the same methods as last year, as described in <https://uasg.tech/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Call-for-Nominations.pdf>, namely preferential ballots, counted with Instant Runoff Voting for the single Chair, and Scottish STV for the 2-3 Vice-Chairs. These methods are among the best ways to elect single and multiple winners for a group like UASG. I suggest adding between old #5 and #6, something like: "For the single Chair position, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices, and the counting method will be Instant Runoff Voting <https://www.opavote.com/methods/instant-runoff-voting>", and "For the 2-3 Vice-Chair positions, voters will cast preferential ballots ranking their choices among all candidates, and the counting method used will be Scottish STV <https://www.opavote.com/methods/single-transferable-vote#scottish-stv>." 3. The process does not define how we will decide whether to elect 2 or 3 Vice-Chairs. There are several rules which we could use. We should state what rule we will follow. I suggest adding it as part of the entry for the Vice-Chair method above. Some rules we could use:
1. If there are 1, 2, or 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they will all be elected by acclamation and they will not be voted on. 2. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on and 3 shall be elected.
3. If there are more than 3 candidates for Vice-Chair, they shall be voted on, and an option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" shall be added to the ballot. Voters may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" the same way as any other candidate. The top two candidates shall be elected. If the option "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" is among the top three finishers, there shall only be two Vice-Chairs, otherwise, there shall be three Vice-Chairs, and the third-place candidate shall also be elected. [Note: this curious option means that voters who think some candidates are unsatisfactory, and a Vice-Chair seat should be left empty rather than be filled by those candidates, may rank "Only 2 Vice-Chairs" above the unsatisfactory candidates, and the counting will respect their wish to the extent possible.]
4. I have no problem with the diversity intent of rule # 4, but I think it is a mistake to enforce this at the nomination stage. Suppose there are two candidates in one organization, "M. Good" and "M. Bad". Rule #4 says that M. Bad can prevent voters from supporting M. Good by submitting their own self-nomination first! Instead I suggest that we implement the rule at the vote-counting stage of the Vice-Chair election. As soon as a candidate is elected during the counting process, we disqualify all other candidates from the same organization or company, and continue (or restart) the counting process. This lets voters, not nominators, choose whether to support "M. Good" or "M. Bad". There is no need for this diversity rule in the Chair election, because only one Chair is elected. I suggest a rule about eliminating Vice-Chair candidates during vote-counting be added, and old rule #4 be deleted.
5. Rule #1 does not clearly say that sock-puppets are forbidden. It should. By saying "the subscribers… are… the electorate", it implies that email addresses, not natural people, are the electorate. I suggest rewording it to say, "The electorate consists of the natural persons subscribed to the UA-Discuss mailing list on [the date of record for the electorate]. Each person may cast at most one ballot. Sock puppets are forbidden." 6. Rule #8 addresses sock puppets as well. Move it to right after rule #1.
7. Rule #1 (and the Election Timeline below) are not clear about the time at which the UASG-Discuss subscriber list creates the electorate. Rule #1 says "the date of announcing the election". But the Election Timeline puts the label "Announcing the starting of the elections" onto a 10-day period. I suggest adding a separate entry to the timeline, labelled something like "Date and time of record for the electorate". Make it a specific UTC time; dates (interpreted with time zones) can span 48 hours. 8. Rule #6 says the election process will be managed by a specialised elections service provider. Who? Why not just say Opavote? And it says, "the final results will be audited and confirmed." How? By whom?
9. I suggest adding a sentence to Rule #6. "A detailed report of the vote counting steps, along with anonymised raw ballot data, shall be published, for transparency and for community auditing." Opavote provides reports and ballot data as a normal part of its service.
Also, a few comments about the Election Timeline:
1. Dates without times or time zones are ambiguous in a global community. I suggest saying "all dates are UTC", or adding UTC times to each date.
2. The voting period should have times and time zones added; dates alone are too ambiguous. If the election starts at 00:00 5 March UTC and ends at 23:59 15 March UTC, that is 11 days, not 10. If it starts on 5 March anywhere in the world, and ends on 15 March anywhere in the world, that is 12 days (00:00 5 March UTC-13:00 to 23:59 15 March UTC+12:00). Only if the election period is defined as a specific time and time zone can it be unambiguously 10 days. The voting period in days should match the duration between start and end times.
3. Suggest adding a timeline entry, "Date and time of record for the electorate". I would recommend it being the same time as the self-nomination period begins, or when the list of candidates is announced. There's a risk of a candidate packing the UA-Discuss with their supporters. The choice of date and time of record can encourage or discourage this.
I hope this is helpful. Can you tell I am interested in electoral process?
Best regards,
—Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada
On 2021-02-04 12:37, Mohamed Elbashir wrote:
Dear UA Community,
Find attached the UASG 2021 elections process and timeline, it will be published on the UASG.tech website.
Thank you!
Best Regards,
Mohamed (Mo) Elbashir
Universal Acceptance (UA) Program Manager
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) One World, One Internet
[id:image001.png@01D356F4.3F3911B0]
_______________________________________________ UA-discuss mailing list UA-discuss@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-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.
--. --Jim DeLaHunt, jdlh@jdlh.com http://blog.jdlh.com/ (http://jdlh.com/) multilingual websites consultant
2201-1000 Beach Ave, Vancouver BC V6E 4M2, Canada Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953
-- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Hello Jim Thank you for wonderfully drafted points. I would discuss with team members and see what are the things could be done for clarity sake. Let me assure you that there would be a agenda item for new leadership i.e "Election and Voting process" to effect the UA charter and I would encourage you to please participate in that discussion to help and guide the most transparent and accurate progress. Your points would be of great help. Offcourse the things like time Zone, start and end time etc may be clearly told for each process end time. Mohamed will take care of it. Best wishes Ajay Data On February 5, 2021 2:07:26 AM GMT+05:30, Mohamed Elbashir <mohamed.elbashir@icann.org> wrote:
Dear UA Community,
Find attached the UASG 2021 elections process and timeline, it will be published on the UASG.tech website.
Thank you!
Best Regards, Mohamed (Mo) Elbashir Universal Acceptance (UA) Program Manager The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) One World, One Internet [id:image001.png@01D356F4.3F3911B0]
-- Sent from my Android device with XGen Email.
participants (9)
-
Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile -
Data -
Dušan Stojičević -
Jim DeLaHunt -
Mark Datysgeld -
Mark Svancarek (CELA) -
Mike Hemp -
Mohamed Elbashir -
salim alfarsi