[governance] Results of IGC Charter Amendment Poll
Ian Peter
ian.peter at ianpeter.com
Sat Feb 16 15:59:42 EST 2013
Avri, yes, I think it's difficult and was trying to find a shortcut.
I will go along with whatever the co coordinators decide, but it seems to me
that if we are going to follow the letter of the law and not re-open the
ballot, the only valid decision is that the vote was lost. That means going
back to the start again, gathering support for amendments, getting a list
together, getting a new ballot together etc. I can't see why when all the
amendments have failed according to a strict interpretation of the rules, we
could really take any shortcuts and ask us to vote on them again without
full process. If we really think a shortcut is desirable, given the strong
support among those who did vote, I think re-opening to those who havent
voted yet is a more desirable path.
But perhaps there are no shortcuts which are acceptable, and we have to
start again. In that case it might be better to wait a few months on
questions of charter amendment discussions, as there are some busy months
ahead between now and June with various policy issues and meetings.
Ian
-----Original Message-----
From: Avri Doria
Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 6:56 AM
To: IGC
Subject: Re: [governance] Results of IGC Charter Amendment Poll
Hi,
Ian, I really really want to agree with you.
Unfortunately Adam is right, we don't want to set a precedent for the
rerunning of a vote whenever we don't get the vote we want. People might
not be voting because they don't care or even because they don't agree.
I think that if the IGC wishes to re-vote, it should be able to decide to do
so. I think calling for a discussion on that and perhaps the substance of
the amendment might be a better process to go through. And if we do go to
vote again, we should plan on a longer period and should work with the
co-cordinators to make sure we get out enough votes. I am not even sure
most of the voters understood the quorum requirement.
Had the co-cordinators decided to lengthen the ballot before knowing the
vote because they saw we were not reaching 'quorum,' I would have applauded
their attention to the details and supported the lengthened call. Since
that did not happen, I really do not support continuing the vote, though I
do think it is reasonable to discuss a re-vote in the IGC, see if there is
consensus on a re-vote and open up the proposed amendment for more
discussion. For myself, I know in my vote there was one amendment I did not
understand well enough to be either for or against. Perhaps I am not
alone.
avri
On 16 Feb 2013, at 14:35, Ian Peter wrote:
> sorry if my last message wasn't clear - I am in favour of counting the
> existing votes as valid, and just looking to boost the numbers of votes
> count, rather than running the whole process again.
>
> Ian
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Adam Peake
> Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 6:27 AM
> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Ian Peter
> Cc: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Subject: Re: [governance] Results of IGC Charter Amendment Poll
>
> Agree it would be helpful to know how many votes.
>
> But before re-doing the vote (how many times, until 'we' get the
> result we want?), could we have the amendments presented again. With
> time for discussion, and then see if again there is support to hold a
> vote.
>
> Adam
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 4:18 AM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>> Hi Sala,
>>
>> How many votes short are we of a positive result?
>>
>> That would determine perhaps the best way to go.
>>
>> In this case I dont think there is any great risk in re-opening the vote
>> to
>> get extra responses. The results in each ballot are clearly in favour of
>> the
>> reforms, the will of the caucus seems clear, it’s just a technicality
>> that
>> we have not had enough responses. (I would feel differently if on any of
>> the
>> ballots the no votes were roughly equivalent to the yes votes)
>>
>> So I would suggest re-opening the ballot to allow those who havent voted
>> to
>> do so – accompanied by encouragement and reminders.
>>
>> Ian
>>
>> From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
>> Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 10:17 PM
>> To: Ian Peter
>> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> Subject: Re: [governance] Results of IGC Charter Amendment Poll
>>
>> Dear Ian and All,
>>
>> You are correct. I apologize to the IGC for the oversight, the mistake is
>> mine.
>>
>> As such, we currently have two options and they are:-
>>
>> Option 1
>> Accept from the votes that all the proposals have failed based on the
>> results of the votes.
>>
>> Option 2
>> Re-run the votes
>>
>>
>> If we take Option 2, we run the risk of setting a precedent for extending
>> voting periods for other things that require voting including coordinator
>> elections. Should we consider the current votes invalid and cast fresh
>> votes
>> or extend the votes.
>>
>> In any event, the current revisions to the Charter that are on the
>> website
>> will be reversed to reflect what it originally was.
>>
>> For the sake of completeness, the record of the votes is as follows:
>>
>> 76 responses were submitted, though some respondents did not answer all
>> questions, as none of them were compulsory.
>>
>> On proposal 1, 70 voted in favour, 4 against, and 2 did not vote.
>> On proposal 2, 62 voted in favour, 5 against, and 9 did not vote.
>> On proposal 3, 71 voted in favour, 2 against, and 3 did not vote.
>> On proposal 4, 65 voted in favour, 3 against, and 8 did not vote.
>>
>> Thank you and Kind Regards,
>> Sala
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sala, are you sure?
>>>
>>> The charter amendment process states that it is 2/3 of membership
>>> required
>>> for charter amendments, not 2/3 of those who bothered to vote. My
>>> understanding is that none of the votes result in charter amendments,
>>> because none of them had over 2/3 of members supporting. The relevant
>>> charter quote is below.
>>>
>>>
>>> Amendments to the Charter
>>>
>>> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten
>>> (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the
>>> members
>>> of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are
>>> based
>>> on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter,
>>> everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for
>>> amending the charter.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> (perhaps it should be different but it isn’t on my reading)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ian Peter
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
>>> Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 8:11 AM
>>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>> Subject: [governance] Results of IGC Charter Amendment Poll
>>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> Greetings! This is a brief update on the results of the IGC Charter
>>> Amendment Poll. Here are the results:
>>>
>>> 76 responses were submitted, though some respondents did not answer all
>>> questions, as none of them were compulsory.
>>>
>>> On proposal 1, 70 voted in favour, 4 against, and 2 did not vote.
>>> On proposal 2, 62 voted in favour, 5 against, and 9 did not vote.
>>> On proposal 3, 71 voted in favour, 2 against, and 3 did not vote.
>>> On proposal 4, 65 voted in favour, 3 against, and 8 did not vote.
>>>
>>> This means that all proposals pass with greater than 80% approval, which
>>> is excess of the 2/3 requirement. The text of the amendments is found
>>> at
>>> http://igcaucus.org/formally-proposed-charter-amendments and the charter
>>> as
>>> amended is at http://igcaucus.org/charter and
>>> http://igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.
>>>
>>> I would also like to acknowledge and thank you all for your
>>> contributions,
>>> elaborate discussion and for taking the time to vote. Thank you to all
>>> those
>>> who proposed the amendments and initiated the process and to all those
>>> who
>>> took part. Special thanks also to Norbert for conducting the Poll and to
>>> Jeremy for helping out.
>>>
>>> With Kind Regards,
>>> Sala (on behalf of the Coordinators)
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>>> P.O. Box 17862
>>> Suva
>>> Fiji
>>>
>>> Twitter: @SalanietaT
>>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
>>> Tel: +679 3544828
>>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>
>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>>
>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>> P.O. Box 17862
>> Suva
>> Fiji
>>
>> Twitter: @SalanietaT
>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
>> Tel: +679 3544828
>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
More information about the Governance
mailing list