<div dir="ltr">Narelle,<div><br></div><div>in fact we have had a no-campaign rule for many years, after some event in the past made it desirable.</div><div><br></div><div>The candidates forum is the substitute for that. If there is any organizing or deal-making for the vote it is kept out of sight (and we positively know there are block votes; we are still carrying the consequences of one.) The debate between the candidates is kept in extemely civil and constrained terms. Both you and I have chaired NomComs and know this in and out.</div>
<div><br></div><div>It is striking that the interest in the positions open to vote has not been intense enough even for all candidates to post in the candidates forum (last time I looked.) This diminishes the transparency of the whole setup (election and action by the Board of Trustees) because it can also look like people are voted without creating any specific expectations or commitments and therefore don't have to be held to account if they fail to fulfill them.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Tons of things to fix and they have been communicated to the Trustees several times over the last few years. I wish we could see a commitment to do so no later than the next election. Do note that not all of this stuff depends on the Bylaws; it is for the Board of Trustees and the Elections Committe (and less so by the NomCom) to establish the detailed calendars and ground rules each year.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Yours,</div><div><br></div><div>Alejandro Pisanty</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 11:22 PM, Narelle Clark, President ISOC-AU <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:president@isoc-au.org.au" target="_blank">president@isoc-au.org.au</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">My understanding of the rationale of the online system is that the<br>
voting delegate can change his/her vote up to the cut off time to give<br>
us a flexible system, allow for additional comment and discussion to<br>
influence your vote.<br>
<br>
I've never seen our elections as suitable for "campaigns" per se, though some<br>
have been known to.<br>
<br>
I have no idea why the limit on changes to a vote is 10 - I would assume that<br>
was an arbitrary (and imho reasonable) design choice that could be<br>
changed if people really see a need for it. Presumably Carlos has<br>
hit the limit!<br>
<br>
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 4:34 AM, Christian de Larrinaga<br>
<<a href="mailto:cdel@firsthand.net">cdel@firsthand.net</a>> wrote:<br>
> Why is this a good idea?<br>
> C<br>
><br>
> Carlos Vera Quintana wrote:<br>
>> You can change your vote 10 times only :)<br>
<br>
<br>
Narelle<br>
admittedly a Board member, though speaking as an individual chapter delegate<br>
<br>
President<br>
ISOC-AU<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed<br>
to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society<br>
Chapter Portal (AMS): <a href="https://portal.isoc.org" target="_blank">https://portal.isoc.org</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br> Dr. Alejandro Pisanty<br>Facultad de Química UNAM<br>Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico<br>
+52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD<br>+525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475<br>Blog: <a href="http://pisanty.blogspot.com" target="_blank">http://pisanty.blogspot.com</a><br>LinkedIn: <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty" target="_blank">http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty</a><br>
Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614" target="_blank">http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614</a><br>Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/apisanty" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/apisanty</a><br>
---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, <a href="http://www.isoc.org" target="_blank">http://www.isoc.org</a><br>. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
</div>