[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Multiple votes from Bill Wall



Steve,

I think Bill's second vote should be the one that counts. 

My interpretation of the rules is that they are designed to prevent two things: first, multiple representatives of a single organization casting different votes (so whose controls), or someone changing their mind repeatedly and casting a vote each time, thereby confusing the counting.

But I think this is different. When I saw Bill's first vote, I thought, "huh? that doesn't make much sense". To me, it was clear what he meant, and I think it was to everyone (judging from what I read following it). I don't think the rule was intended to cover accidents, especially when they are corrected almost immediately. So I would urge that his second, intended vote count.

Cheers,

Matt



On May 17, 2013, at 8:37 AM, "Booth, Harold" <harold.booth@nist.gov> wrote:

> We agree and think his intended (second) vote should count given his statements about misunderstanding the ballot and the quick follow-up after realizing his mistake.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Harold
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-cve-editorial-board-list@lists.mitre.org [mailto:owner-cve-editorial-board-list@lists.mitre.org] On Behalf Of Andy Balinsky (balinsky)
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 6:44 PM
> To: Christey, Steven M.
> Cc: Wall, William (wwall); cve-editorial-board-list
> Subject: Re: Multiple votes from Bill Wall
> 
> While I realize that changing the rules during a vote is irregular, the original rule to me seemed to be without any purpose. If it had a purpose, it seems that a misunderstanding of the ballot should be a stronger purpose than whatever original purpose there was. 
> 
> I can understand the purpose if you have >1 vote from different individuals in an org. Then the rule avoids having to litigate who is the legitimate rep for that org. But in the case of a misunderstanding, it seems an unnecessary restriction.
> 
> Maybe in the end, it will not matter, but if option B wins by 1 vote, based on a misunderstanding, I think the board will have to revisit the decision.
> 
> Just my thoughts. 
> 
> Andy
> 
> On May 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, "Christey, Steven M." <coley@mitre.org> wrote:
> 
>> Bill,
>> 
>> Today you sent two separate ballots to the Board list.  Your first ballot, which was valid, seemed to prefer Option B, but then 2 hours later, you sent a DIFFERENT ballot that switched to Option A, and you changed your reasons.
>> 
>> According to the voting rules, the first valid vote from a Board member is used and cannot be reversed:
>> 
>> 	8. No changes to a vote will be accepted; no reclama.
>> 
>> While these rules are pretty clear, it would be useful to be clear about what your real intention was, and why the switch occurred.
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> Steve




 
Page Last Updated: October 03, 2014