[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ICANN-EU] Measuring Election Success
- To: Alexander Svensson <svensson@icannchannel.de>
- Subject: Re: [ICANN-EU] Measuring Election Success
- From: Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:43:19 +0200
- Cc: icann-europe@fitug.de
- Comment: This message comes from the icann-europe mailing list.
- In-Reply-To: <E13jG5V-0001Hd-00@mrvdom02.schlund.de>; from svensson@icannchannel.de on Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 09:14:00AM +0200
- Mail-Followup-To: Alexander Svensson <svensson@icannchannel.de>,icann-europe@fitug.de
- References: <E13jG5V-0001Hd-00@mrvdom02.schlund.de>
- Sender: owner-icann-europe@fitug.de
- User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.9i
On 2000-10-11 09:14:00 +0200, Alexander Svensson wrote:
>> 2. FAIR ACCESS TO THE BALLOT--ICANN must offer fair and open
>> access to the ballot. An evaluation of the nominations process
>> should judge whether there was real access to the ballot by
>> alternative candidates, not just those nominated by a
>> Board-dominated committee.
> Member-nom candidates won in Europe and North America, nom-com
> candidates won in Africa, Asia/Australia/Pacific and Latin
> America/Caribbean. But limiting the number of candidates to seven
> and pre-nominating five of them in Europe obviously made it very
> hard for potential member-nom candidates.
I'm not sure about this. Most important, it concnetrated votes
"against nomcom" on few candidates.
--
Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>