Hello, > It is a widely-accepted principle that, if a written process is silent on > some point, then the intent should be considered.
[...] > The Board recognises the objections that were raised a few days after the > election, on Wednesday 16 May 2018, but notes that no objections were raised > on the day of the election, Thursday 10 May 2018. The Board has decided that > the results stand as they were announced immediately after the votes were > counted. That means that the affected seats remain vacant for the time being. This seems to me to be the sensible thing to do. > The Board recognises that the process does not make it clear what happens > when “None of the above” receives the most votes in an election with multiple > candidates. The Board would like to encourage the committee handling the > election in future to ensure that members understand the election guidelines > before voting starts. Furthermore, the Board intends to review the election > process for future elections which will include a public consultation. The > Board will also consider an appeal process during the review of the guideline I think the decisions of the board in this are the right answer for the stability, openness and transparency of Afrinic. Thank you for your clarifications and summary. Cheers, Sander
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss@afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
