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

Re: Multiple votes from Bill Wall


  • To: "Christey, Steven M." <coley@mitre.org>
  • Subject: Re: Multiple votes from Bill Wall
  • From: "Andy Balinsky (balinsky)" <balinsky@cisco.com>
  • Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 22:44:09 +0000
  • Accept-Language: en-US
  • CC: "Wall, William (wwall)" <wwall@harris.com>, cve-editorial-board-list<cve-editorial-board-list@lists.mitre.org>
  • Delivery-Date: Thu May 16 18:44:22 2013
  • DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1415; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1368744255; x=1369953855; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=PI1Gj43BaIxEPM0ZI19JJqvL/t+YHcdoIptjzuqWx8M=; b=d46DWKN1yJZDYOi6UTSD7Pa8d6TieM4snwZZhmv7ot5F6XgfVKnSox4u 0WKYdF58AnVqB9c1OSWREuy9DsQZk6IOhBNeiHT55KFTY8AkDOEBxm4Fa 1q4afsVd6n8iSo+CgZ/oRN+g7g6fLNWV5cx5wGFZW7zO3bWPYrjJ0Go2v w=;
  • In-Reply-To: <FC72FC641B949240B947AC6F1F83FBAF0909FD22@IMCMBX01.MITRE.ORG>
  • References: <FC72FC641B949240B947AC6F1F83FBAF0909FD22@IMCMBX01.MITRE.ORG>
  • Thread-Index: Ac5SbyeVJ6Q++77tSKq3s2Z5TfDU7AAQaH+A
  • Thread-Topic: 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: May 22, 2013