ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[registrars]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[registrars] Voting Facts


Nikolaj:

I agree with you on most points. I must admit that I am not exactly the most
knowledgeable person with the new system, although I have managed to add
some people to the roster with some help from Rick. In fact, I have NOT BEEN
ABLE TO VOTE in the last two elections because I was accessing the system
with the wrong account :-)  It seems Rick set up two accounts for me mpalage
and mikep, which sort of adds to my confusion.

Only under the mikep account was I able to vote, and have full access to the
voting process. See the email below where I told Rick about my voting
problems previously. Never quite totally figured it out until last night
after the vote closed. After playing around with the system today I think I
finally figured out how I could gain access to the system during voting - a
rather powerful tool indeed - and a serious flaw in the software IMHO.

To my knowledge the only person that accessed the system during the voting
process to view cast ballots was Rick, when we asked him during our
executive call on Monday.  At this time he told us that there was a total of
15 votes out of the 33 votes cast. Rick and I have different accounts, I am
the "Board Chair" and he is "Admin". I really can't tell what differences if
any these different accounts have.

As stated yesterday there were a number of reasons that were discussed why
the voting should be extended, US holiday, bad snow storm in the
mid-Atlantic region, people traveling, precedent of NC extending its
discussion period because of the foregoing. But it was Rick's information
that suggested that only 15 people had voted that indicated to us that more
people may need time to vote.  AT NO TIME DID I ACCESS THE SYSTEM TO SEE THE
VOTING TABULATIONS. I AGREE WITH EVERYONE THAT HAD I GAINED ACCESS TO THIS
INFORMATION ONLINE AND THEN USED IT TO SUPPORT MY CANDIDATE IT WOULD HAVE
BEEN A CLEAR VIOLATION OF TRUST AND ETHICS. Instead, I did exactly the same
as TUCOWS employees, use publicly available information to call people and
explain to voting members the pros and cons of each candidate.

After discussing the different aspects of extending the deadline between
Rick, Ken, Bruce and myself, Rick stated that he had extended the deadline.
According to the original voting notice from the system, the vote was to
close at Wednesday, 19 February 2003 @ 12:00 am GMT. Rick stated that he had
added an addition 24 hours to the voting timeline.

After the call I began to actively contact representatives of the
constituency encouraging them to get their vote out, and expressing my view
as to why I thought Henning was the better of the two qualified candidates.
AGAIN AT NO TIME DID I ACCESS INFORMATION ON HOW PEOPLE WERE VOTING ONLINE.
For those registrars that did not have an account, I gave them instructions
on how to fax in the data form for Rick to create an account.

During my discussion with these people I told them that voting had been
extended for 24 hours based upon the decision reached on Monday's call.
Because Rick was taking the red eye on Tuesday evening and was going to be
in the FTC meeting all day Wed and Thu I told people to fax their ballot
into the Registrar Constituency efax account to make sure that their vote
was recorded in case of any problems. There were a total of 3 ballots
received in this manner during the voting period.

Yesterday afternoon, Rick made a post to the list regarding what he
perceived as Ballot Games. At 12:00 am GMT Wednesday 19, 2003 I received an
email stating that voting had closed. (I mistaken confused 12:00 am GMT with
12:00 (noon) GMT - when using GMT I generally default to military time where
12:00 am GMT would be 00:00 GMT.)  None of the people that were involved in
Monday's call were consulted and it appears that the software screwed up or
that Rick unilaterally reinstated the original voting deadline, despite his
claims Monday evening that he extended the voting period for an additional
24 hours. Now whether people disagree with the decision that was reached
collectively on Monday by the Executive Committee, I do have a problem if it
is found that Rick cancelled the original voting extension unilaterally,
i.e. there was no software bug.

IN CONCLUSION:

- At no time during the voting process did I access the online voting
results, only Rick did so at the request of the Executive Committee on
Monday;

- It was agreed to on the Registrar Executive Committee call this Monday (by
Rick, Mike, Bruce and Ken) to extend voting 24 hours because of low turn out
confirmed by Rick after accessing the online voting system;

- The voting closed at the original voting deadline of 12:00 am GMT, this
action occurred because of either a software bug or Rick changing the time
back to the original deadline unilaterally.

- The software system we use has a serious flaw in that voting members, Rick
or I, can gain access to the vote as they are being cast. I do not think
that it justifies the current $250 monthly expense. Every voting system we
have investigated to date has had some limitations. I think a neutral, less
expensive, solution has to exist somewhere. (see post from Patrick)

- We need to come up with a proposed solution for resolving this voting
dilemma first thing Friday morning.

- With regard to the suggested allegations that I supported Henning because
I wanted him to assist me on getting on the Board, I believe I had refuted
those allegations by demonstrating that I would not be seeking a seat via
the nominating committee (seats 1-8), and that I have no other interests
beside me believing he is the better of the two qualified candidates.

- I categorically deny the suggested allegations that I accessed the online
voting system and then used the information inappropriately to advocate my
nominated candidate.  As previously stated, Rick Wesson was the only one
authorized by the Executive Committee on Monday to undertake this activity.
I think the fact that I had trouble casting my vote the last two elections
is rather self evident of the problems I have had with the system because of
the two accounts.


Best regards,

Michael D. Palage







EMAIL #1 UNABLE TO ACCESS BALLOT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael D. Palage [mailto:michael@palage.com]
> Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 11:52 AM
> To: Registrars Executive Committee
> Subject: Voting Problem
>
>
> Rick
>
> I logged into the BoardRoom software but it said that there were
> no open ballots? What did I do wrong?
>
> I vote for the representatives of GoDaddy and Neteka in
> connection with IDNs
>
> Will not be home before the end of the day when the ballot.
>
> Thanks
>
> Palage
>
>


EMAIL #2 - START OF VOTING


> -----Original Message-----
> From: registrars@boardrooms.org [mailto:registrars@boardrooms.org]
> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 12:01 AM
> To: michael@palage.com
> Subject: Groups - boardrm - New ballot "ICANN Nomination Committee"
>
>
> ICANN Registrars Constituency member,
>
> A new ballot has been presented to ICANN Registrars Constituency.
>  To vote on this ballot, go here:
>
> http://www.boardrooms.org/apps/org/workgroup/registrars/ballot.php?id=17
>
> Please DO NOT REPLY to this email; instead, vote using the above link.
>
> The text of this ballot is as follows:
> ---
> "ICANN Nomination Committee"
> We have two nominees for constituency representation for the
> ICANN Nomination Committee. Please select one as the constituency
> representative
>
> - Grote, Henning <Henning.Grote@telekom.de>
> - Noss, Elliot <enoss@tucows.com>
> - Abstain
>
> Referenced Items
> Date            Name                             Type
> ----            ----                             ----
> 12 Feb          msg00083.html                    Reference Document
> 12 Feb          msg00049.html                    Reference Document
>
> ---
>
> The ballot closes Wednesday, 19 February 2003 @ 12:00 am GMT.
> Please vote before then by visiting:
>
> http://www.boardrooms.org/apps/org/workgroup/registrars/ballot.php?id=17
>
> Thank you,
> Boardrooms Administration


EMAIL #3 - CLOSE OF VOTING

> -----Original Message-----
> From: registrars@boardrooms.org [mailto:registrars@boardrooms.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 7:01 PM
> To: michael@palage.com
> Subject: Groups - boardrm - Ballot "ICANN Nomination Committee" has
> closed
>
>
> ICANN Registrars Constituency member,
>
> A ballot presented to ICANN Registrars Constituency has closed.
> The text of this closed ballot is as follows:
> ---
> "ICANN Nomination Committee"
> We have two nominees for constituency representation for the
> ICANN Nomination Committee. Please select one as the constituency
> representative
>
> - Grote, Henning <Henning.Grote@telekom.de>
> - Noss, Elliot <enoss@tucows.com>
> - Abstain
>
> Referenced Items
> Date            Name                             Type
> ----            ----                             ----
> 12 Feb          msg00083.html                    Reference Document
> 12 Feb          msg00049.html                    Reference Document
>
> ---
>
>
> Detailed voting results for all closed ballots are available on
> the registrars eVote Archive at:
> http://www.boardrooms.org/apps/org/workgroup/registrars/ballot_archive.php
>
> Thank you,
> Boardrooms Administration
>

>



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>