[governance] IGC coordinator election results

[shaila mistry]

Hi Jeremy 
Thank you for getting me the ballot. I was wondering if my ballot was the 
unfinished one ? In any case can you make sure that my name remains on the 
ballot for the next year and I dont get eliminated. I have been with the WSIS 
and IGF since 2003
Thanks 
Shaila  

 challenge the rules ...push the barriers....
............live beyond your existential means !!


From: Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>

To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Sent: Sat, October 9, 2010 9:19:39 PM
Subject: [governance] IGC coordinator election results

I am pleased to announce the results of the 2010 IGF coordinator elections.  All 
candidates polled respectably, indicating that they were all well-qualified 
nominees for the post.  However, we have a clear winner.  Congratulations and 
welcome to my new colleague, Izumi Aizu.

There were 107 attempts to vote, of which 103 were valid responses.  The invalid 
responses were two respondents who commenced the survey but did not answer 
compulsory questions (one "Are you a member of the IGC" and the other, having 
answered that "Yes", not answering "Have you already voted"), another respondent 
who abandoned the survey before voting for a coordinator and tried again later 
successfully, and one who attempted to vote for coordinator twice.

Of the 103 valid responses, 101 were from self-identified IGC members, 95 of 
whom claimed not to have voted already.  Four of these remaining qualified 
voters did not choose to vote for a coordinator.  Of the remaining 91 votes 
cast, Izumi received 52.  Thanks also to Rafik who received 13 votes and Marilia 
who received 26.

The public statistics for the poll, and a spreadsheet with the results of the 
election are both available at http://www.igcaucus.org/node/38.  A photo of the 
new coordinators is available at http://www.igcaucus.org/node/17.

I will write separately about the charter vote and the nominations committee.

Here are some questions you may have about the results (though I can't really 
call them "frequently asked"):

Q: Why do the public statistics show 100 (not 103) responses?

A: Because by design of the software, these statistics exclude "incomplete" 
responses.  Of the four respondents who did not choose a coordinator, one just 
skipped that question, whereas the others quit the survey in progress.  The 
former's response is included in the public statistics, and the others are not.

Q. Why do the public statistics show 98 (not 101) voters asserting membership of 
the IGC?

A. See the answer to the previous question.

Q: Why do the public statistics show 92 (not 95) persons claiming not to have 
already voted?

A: See the answer to the previous question.

Q. Why do there appear to be some votes missing from the CSV file (based on the 
consecutive numbering)?

A. The missing ones at the beginning where from testing by me and Ginger.  There 
are a small number of missing votes where I deleted them because the person 
mistakenly claimed to have voted already (see below).

Q. Why do three people appear to have voted twice?

A. One of these people mistakenly answered that he had voted already.  I told 
him to vote again using the token sent to his other email address.  Another gave 
up before getting to the coordinator vote, then started again; her first 
response was treated as invalid.  The third does appear to be a double vote; in 
this case, the first response has been treated as invalid and the second, more 
complete response taken as definitive.  It is not counted in the public 
statistics, but is retained in the spreadsheet of results.

Q. Why did some people say that they had already voted, when they hadn't?

A. I don't know, maybe they didn't read the question carefully enough?  Anyone 
who contacted me to ask for the opportunity to re-cast their vote, was able to 
do so.  A few, unfortunately, didn't contact me, and missed out on the 
opportunity to vote...

Q. How did one person vote anonymously?

A. It was not really anonymous, they just didn't provide their name.  Their 
email address is news [at] chania.di.uoa.gr.  Anyway, theirs was one of the 
invalid responses that was not counted, as they did not answer a compulsory 
question.

Q. What is the difference between "No", "None" and "N/A"?

A. "No" means you were asked a Yes/No question and chose the latter.  "None", 
for the coordinator vote, means you were qualified to vote and chose to support 
none of the candidates.  "N/A" means either you were not qualified to vote, or 
you didn't answer that question.

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm
Project Coordinator
Consumers International
Kuala Lumpur Office for Asia Pacific and the Middle East
Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
CI is 50
Consumers International marks 50 years of the global consumer movement in 2010.
Celebrate with us as we continue to support, promote and protect consumer rights 
around the world. 
http://www.consumersinternational.org/50

Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20101012/bbd4b894/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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t