[governance] Results of charter amendment vote

[Eric Dierker]

Please tell us more about your experience in extending votes.
 
What is the criteria used?  Who decides to extend them? Do incumbents fair better than others? Are they referendums?
 
I note that your national elections have never been extended. What elections are your refering to that are extended?
 
This is very important to governance and your insight should be shared.

--- On Mon, 9/28/09, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> wrote:


From: Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>
Subject: Re: [governance] Results of charter amendment vote
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Monday, September 28, 2009, 8:36 AM


Dear IGC

I respect the concerns raised by Danny and others with regard to the
extension of the vote, particularly as the nature of the vote involved
amending the IGC charter. 

But I believe that in the final analysis the majority of voting members
expressed their view, and, if the voting period was not extended, and
there were a number of people who felt that for one reason or another
they did not have an opportunity to vote, we would be in a state of
limbo that would undermine our ability to work as a caucus.

As Magaly said: "...the number of votes in favor of the charter
amendment is very higher in relation to who is against, I think this
disparity say much more about the decision of list members to adopt the
new text than if all the rules were strictly followed or not."  It is
also not clear that extension violated any rule.

My understanding of the coordinators' decision was that they were
motivated by trying to maximise participation. I think this was the
right thing to do, even if not ideal. 

The consequences of a charter amendment vote being taken when some
people felt that they did not have sufficient opportunity to vote would
have been equally unsettling for the caucus. I would have prefered for
the voting period not to be extended, but under the circumstances I
believe it was the best course of action, and consistent with the goal
of getting as many people as possible to participate (which I believe is
the responsibility of the coordinators).

This period in the IGC has been a pretty grim one, but such periods are
normal in groups of people that work together. We will get beyond it. 

>From my many years of experience in online voting (APC has been using
this method since the early 1990s) extension of voting periods, or
meeting periods, has been needed more often than not.

We have never done this to influence the outcome of the vote, but rather
as a means to give the decisions and outcomes greater legitimacy and
endurance through ensuring that the largest number of people in our
network participates. We also rarely make use of secret ballots. In
fact, we only make use of a secret ballot when members elect the board
of directors.

Btw, I found Paul Lehto's comments about the secret ballot very
interesting.. thanks for posting Paul.

Recently APC has revised our bylaws in line with changes in non-profit
law in California (where APC is registered). 

One of the really awkward things we had to get around was that
California law does not allow for asynchronous online meetings of the
organisation's governing bodies (we have a board, and a member council).
Eletronic meetings are considered legal, but only if they are in real
time using telephone, online or video conferencing.

We found this very annoying as we have always worked asynchronously, and
want to to continue to do so. It is cheaper, suits people who are busy,
and who are located in just about all timezones.

To get around this we have developed a complex methodology for online
meetings that involved an online "pre-meeting discussion" which can be
asynchronous, and which is then followed by a written ballot which can
be submitted electronically.

Not ideal... but necessary to comply with the rules :) Fortunately we
don't use voting very often.

Cheers

Anriette





____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090928/f51fad31/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance