[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [council] FW: Miscounted vote in Ballot 8
My advice is based upon general principles of US corporations law. I remind
you that the Names Council is not a government; it is an advisory body
within the ICANN structure.
The circumstances behind the mis-tallied ballot are straightforward and do
not involve malicious intent on anyone's part. [See Elisabeth's email of
earlier today.] The only question is how best to proceed -- how to prevent
further NC time being wasted on inefficiencies while at the same time
ensuring that the process is fair and transparent.
>From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of
>Sent: Sunday, October 17, 1999 9:42 PM
>Cc: Names Council (E-mail); Andrew McLaughlin (E-mail)
>Subject: Re: [council] FW: Miscounted vote in Ballot 8
>> On behalf of the Names Council, you have asked the ICANN staff to
>> investigate the circumstances under which a Ballot 8 vote was
>> verify that the error was inadvertent, and to offer advice as to how the
>> Names Council should proceed.
>It is helpful to have the view of the ICANN staff.
>I would, however, add that irregularities in the election of Board
>Members is a
>serious matter. We should additional;y require enquiry by an
>totally unconnected to ICANN and I so propose.
>> Where (i) a voter's intended vote is miscounted, (ii) the error
>> the miscount was not entirely the fault of the voter, (iii) the
>> vote would have materially altered the outcome of the ballot, had it been
>> properly counted, and (iv) the error is promptly detected and
>> proper course of action is to repeat the voting round in which the error
>In which section of the ICANN By-laws or election rules is this
>It sounds like you are quoting from particular paragraphs
>Please supply a reference to these provisions so that we can
>determine how they apply
>to the current circumstances in which we find ourselves.
>Thanks for your help.