[NCUC-EC] Conduct of the NCUC Election

[William Drake]

Hi 

On Oct 6, 2013, at 6:14 AM, Edward Morris <edward.morris at ALUMNI.USC.EDU> wrote:
> 
> 
> Should we concerned about the propriety of any EC member on the ballot contacting folks individually as an EC member asking them to vote? Does this give the EC member an advantage in a contested election?

Hmm…a few of us have done this in the past but I thought maybe some wouldn't take the time again so I suggested the EC.  But I guess you're right, times have changed and this might not be advisable.  
> 
> In terms of the dates, I reiterate my opposition to this schedule. I feel the current EC should work without the distraction of an election through to CD.

What work would the EC be doing for this meeting that would be distracted by an election?

Again, the later we do this, the later the new EC gets going, and there will be a lot to do before Singapore.  And nobody at the CD will have a clue what the new EC might look like, which could limit the discussion a bit.  Getting a little clarity sooner than later would also help in dealing with staff and others.   Why we should rush through a bylaws revision that doesn't have to happen quickly but delay an election which should is beyond me, but whatever, it doesn't matter enough to merit cycles of debate.  But Glen has to be available to start it, so that'd mean a launch no earlier than Tuesday 3 December, so instead of
> 
> October 21-November 7: Nominations submitted to ncuc-discuss (2 1/2 weeks, negates the IGF distraction)
> November 8-21: Nominees submit statements (BA attendees would have a week prior, and can advance plan, nominations having gone on for weeks before)
> November 22- December 5: Election period
> December 6: Results announced

we could do like

November 1 or 5 - November 18: Nominations submitted to ncuc-discuss  (depends if we want more than 2 weeks)
November 19 (CD) - December 2: Nominees submit statements  
December 3 − 16: Election period
December 17: Results announced

Sound ok?

On Oct 5, 2013, at 10:31 PM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncuc at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO> wrote:
> 
> Alternatively, since NCUC membership is by definition a subset
> of NCSG membership, we could use NCSG's check, i.e., define
> an NCUC member to be in good standing if they're so in NCSG.

We've not done that before and NCUC members who didn't respond to Robin's NCSG check in had no expectation that they'd be disqualified from voting in the NCUC election as well.  I don't see what the advantage would be of potentially disenfranchising and annoying members and then having to back track and figure out a solution on the listserv. 

Glad to hear your data base has all the emails and is clear on org size etc, should make things operationally a lot more manageable.  We just need to get it in shape then to send to Glen to input into their system.

Thanks,

Bill


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20131006/3d8493c3/attachment.html>