[SSC] SSC TC Election - protest results

[L.Wood at surrey.ac.uk]

Ron,

I haven't seen either a public or private reply to my message a week ago, below.

So, I'll repeat my concern, hopefully more clearly. (I haven't yet contacted the comsoc chair.) You previously wrote:

>   Voting eligibility was set prior to the election as any member of
>   the TC.  This is documented as approved in the SSC TC minutes from
>   ICC2010.

I can't find that approval in the minutes of ICC2010.

My concern is that, if a decision was made and approved that all list members are eligible to vote, this decision was:
a. not recorded in the minutes and therefore not made available to list members
b. not communicated to list members

leading to an election where a number of eligible voters, who didn't know they were eligible, did not vote, because they didn't know that they _could_ vote. Which explains the voting turnout of just over 50 in a list membership of nearer 250 - a turnout which would not reach the necessary two-third majority consensus described elsewhere.

Is this the case?

Was this decision taken on voting eligibility? If it was, why was it not recorded in the minutes?
Why was it not communicated to list members?

thanks,

L.

On 22 Jul 2010, at 09:40, Wood L Dr (Electronic Eng) wrote:

> Ron,
> 
> Did I confuse TC member and voting member? I quote your earlier mail:
> 
>   Voting eligibility was set prior to the election as any member of
>   the TC.  This is documented as approved in the SSC TC minutes from
>   ICC2010.
> 
> in other words, you say that the minutes of ICC2010 say that they're the same thing. (I can't see that approval in the minutes of ICC2010 myself; there's not a copy on the website, which has 2009 minutes, but fortunately in the mailing list archives:
> http://lists.scnl.dist.unige.it/pipermail/ssc/attachments/20100603/6e2363bc/attachment-0003.pdf )
> 
> I would personally expect that (active? how to define?) list membership for a period of several years be a minimum requirement for anyone standing for a post.
> 
> 
>> I think it is time to stop broadcasting these messages to the entire TC.
> 
> Why? This is clearly the most interest and activity on the mailing list that the TC has seen in years!
> 
> To quote from those selfsame minutes, agreeing suggestions by email from Mario:
> 
>   5) SSC need to generate visible activity from the Committee
>   on a continual basis and not just at the meetings held at ICC and Globecom.
>   Much of this could be done by email, but it needs to involve persons other
>   than the committee executives.
> 
> and this topic is certainly achieving that.
> 
> I previously asked on this list:
> 
>  The policy document also says:
>  'It is necessary to register to vote and two-thirds of
>  those registered must vote.'
> 
>   I ask when registration for voting was held. Do we have
>   two-thirds majority consensus? Is the vote that was done
>   of *registered* *voting members* using the definition given
>   in the policy document, and do we have two-thirds majority
>   voting from those registered voting members?
> 
> and don't believe I have seen answers to those questions. If voting eligibility is of any member of the TC, when did registration take place?
> 
> regards,
> 
> L.
> 
> On 22 Jul 2010, at 03:12, Smith, Ron P (AS) wrote:
> 
>> Lloyd,
>> I believe you are confusing TC member and voting member.  Regardless, it
>> is not a requirement to be either type of member to be a candidate.
>> Also, it is irrelevant whether Nei Kato attended 2 of the past 5 TC
>> meetings, as his vote was not "re-counted" in that category for the
>> analysis of the protest.
>> 
>> I think it is time to stop broadcasting these messages to the entire TC.
>> In the future I will respond personally to any questions addressed to me
>> instead of broadcasting replies.  
>> 
>> If anyone is still not satisfied with the results and think they have a
>> valid protest, please directly contact either the outgoing SSC TC chair
>> or the ComSoc TAC chair.  
>> 
>> Thank you all for bearing with this process.
>> Ron
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: L.Wood at surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood at surrey.ac.uk] 
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 5:50 PM
>> To: Smith, Ron P (AS)
>> Cc: L.Wood at surrey.ac.uk; talebtarik at gmail.com; ssc at scnl.dist.unige.it
>> Subject: EXTERNAL:Re: [SSC] SSC TC Election - protest results
>> 
>> 
>> On 21 Jul 2010, at 21:18, Smith, Ron P (AS) wrote:
>>> 
>>> The SSC TC Officers Selection and Nomination Committee found Nei Kato
>> to be a credible candidate working in the field of the TC, in addition
>> he is a member of the TC, further as addressed previously his nomination
>> was received prior to the deadline.  We thus found him to be a valid
>> candidate.
>> 
>> I question the statement that Kato is a member of the TC, either now or
>> at the time of election.
>> 
>> http://committees.comsoc.org/ssc/mem/mem.htm#K
>> indicates individual attendance.
>> 
>> My understanding from that is that Kato attended the TC meetings at:
>> - ICC 2006 in Istanbul and Globecom 2006 in San Francisco.
>> - ICC 2010 in Cape Town.
>> 
>> You write:
>>> various recount criteria used are as follows:
>>> i.  Only attendees of 2 of the past 5 TC meetings.
>> 
>> Did Kato attend 2 of the past 5 TC meetings in person? (with Globecom
>> and ICC, that's two a year, so attending the 2006 events does not
>> count.) This attendance is a requirement of those voting for him, as
>> peers; it should also apply to Kato himself, otherwise his candidacy as
>> first among his peers is invalidated. My take would be that Kato's TC
>> membership lapsed after not attending three TC meetings subsequent to
>> Globecom 2006, and that attending only ICC 2010 was not enough to
>> reinstate that membership.
>> 
>> I can't get myself elected President of the United States by just moving
>> there after having visited a couple of times a few years ago. Indeed, I
>> think there are provisions carefully put in place to prevent such a
>> thing from happening.
>> 
>> 
>>> I hope this resolves the matter.
>> 
>> Sorry, it does not.
> 

Lloyd Wood
L.Wood at surrey.ac.uk
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood