From info at arin.net Thu Jan 6 11:38:29 2022 From: info at arin.net (ARIN) Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2022 11:38:29 -0500 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Message-ID: <2FCA5AFC-4D90-4E61-8F07-067034783156@arin.net> The Board of Trustees maintains authority over the scope, mission, and along with the President and Chief Executive Officer establishes ARIN?s strategic direction and fiscal oversight. The Board also has oversight authority of the nomination, appointment, and election of individuals to Board committees and similar roles. Over the past two years, as part of its fiduciary duties, the ARIN Board of Trustees (?Board?) has undertaken a review of ARIN?s governance structures, including the voting system for ARIN elections. As part of this effort, an independent, outside consultant was engaged to review ARIN?s governance structures and provide recommendations. One recommendation that has arisen from this governance review is to replace the current first-past-the-post (FPTP) voting system with single transferrable voting (STV), also known as ranked-choice voting. STV would provide the ability for the community to realize the following primary benefits: ? Greater voting choice. Voters rank candidates in order of preference; ? A more proportional result. Successful candidates more broadly represent voter sentiment versus a single issue. There is better representation of member minority views; ? No wasted votes. Fewer votes are cast for losing candidates or needlessly cast for run-away winners; ? Designed for multiple winners; and ? Reduced opportunities for tactical voting. STV has some disadvantages: ? It is possible for a single candidate to win without crossing the winning threshold; ? The process is more complicated to understand and implement than FPTP; and ? In some cases, ballots that don't rank all candidates may be discarded. We feel the benefits above outweigh the disadvantages. STV is currently being used by RIPE. Board Proposal: ARIN will use an online, fully electronic STV system for ARIN elections. The nomination process existing at the time of implementation will be used. Modifications to the nomination process to implement STV are expected to be minimal. ARIN seeks community feedback on this proposed use of the STV system for ARIN elections and the required amendments to ARIN's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws. This consultation will remain open for 30 days: https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/2022-1/ ? Changes to Articles of Incorporation: https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/2022_1__STV_ExhibitA.pdf ? Redline changes to ARIN Bylaws: https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/2022_1__STV_ExhibitB.pdf Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 7 February 2022. Regards, John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) From lambert at psc.edu Thu Jan 6 12:04:10 2022 From: lambert at psc.edu (Michael H Lambert) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2022 12:04:10 -0500 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Message-ID: <0E71F7CE-89BD-47AB-9442-06BC01201CE5@psc.edu> John, Could you (or someone else with ARIN) please describe the specific STV mechanism(s) (particularly establishing quotas and transferring votes) that would be used in ARIN elections? I think that would be relevant to the discussion. Thanks, Michael ----- Michael H Lambert, GigaPoP Manager Phone: +1 412 268-4960 Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center/3ROX FAX: +1 412 268-5832 300 S Craig St, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA lambert at psc.edu From scottleibrand at gmail.com Thu Jan 6 12:22:41 2022 From: scottleibrand at gmail.com (Scott Leibrand) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2022 09:22:41 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: <2FCA5AFC-4D90-4E61-8F07-067034783156@arin.net> References: <2FCA5AFC-4D90-4E61-8F07-067034783156@arin.net> Message-ID: <874FAB07-ACAA-4131-B44F-80C40B35DC2E@gmail.com> Yes, please. I assume the ?may be discarded? disadvantage is solely referring to ballots who only rank candidates that get eliminated early due to lack of votes. In that case STV is no worse than the current system, so I wouldn?t necessarily consider it a disadvantage. Scott > On Jan 6, 2022, at 8:38 AM, ARIN wrote: > > ?The Board of Trustees maintains authority over the scope, mission, and along with the President and Chief Executive Officer establishes ARIN?s strategic direction and fiscal oversight. The Board also has oversight authority of the nomination, appointment, and election of individuals to Board committees and similar roles. > > Over the past two years, as part of its fiduciary duties, the ARIN Board of Trustees (?Board?) has undertaken a review of ARIN?s governance structures, including the voting system for ARIN elections. As part of this effort, an independent, outside consultant was engaged to review ARIN?s governance structures and provide recommendations. > > One recommendation that has arisen from this governance review is to replace the current first-past-the-post (FPTP) voting system with single transferrable voting (STV), also known as ranked-choice voting. STV would provide the ability for the community to realize the following primary benefits: > > ? Greater voting choice. Voters rank candidates in order of preference; > ? A more proportional result. Successful candidates more broadly represent voter sentiment versus a single issue. There is better representation of member minority views; > ? No wasted votes. Fewer votes are cast for losing candidates or needlessly cast for run-away winners; > ? Designed for multiple winners; and > ? Reduced opportunities for tactical voting. > > STV has some disadvantages: > > ? It is possible for a single candidate to win without crossing the winning threshold; > ? The process is more complicated to understand and implement than FPTP; and > ? In some cases, ballots that don't rank all candidates may be discarded. > > We feel the benefits above outweigh the disadvantages. STV is currently being used by RIPE. > > Board Proposal: > > ARIN will use an online, fully electronic STV system for ARIN elections. > > The nomination process existing at the time of implementation will be used. Modifications to the nomination process to implement STV are expected to be minimal. > > ARIN seeks community feedback on this proposed use of the STV system for ARIN elections and the required amendments to ARIN's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws. This consultation will remain open for 30 days: https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/2022-1/ > > ? Changes to Articles of Incorporation: https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/2022_1__STV_ExhibitA.pdf > > ? Redline changes to ARIN Bylaws: https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/2022_1__STV_ExhibitB.pdf > > Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. > > Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 7 February 2022. > > Regards, > > John Curran > President and CEO > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Consult > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing > List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services > Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. From athompson at merlin.mb.ca Thu Jan 6 13:37:05 2022 From: athompson at merlin.mb.ca (Adam Thompson) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2022 18:37:05 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Anything is better than first-past-the-post, as a general rule. I don't mind STV as described *informally* in the Consultation document. However, the amendments are so short on details that I would be opposed to this, as presented right now. The Articles change enables other approaches, nothing more. Then the Bylaws change simply... enables other approaches. I'm not seeing any changes that even allude to STV. As written, I could be voting for an amendment that enables ARIN to make someone Benevolent Dictator for Life! As those Wendy's commercials made so famous a few decades ago, "Where's the meat?" -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services MERLIN 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca > -----Original Message----- > From: ARIN-announce On Behalf Of > ARIN > Sent: Thursday, January 6, 2022 10:39 AM > To: arin-announce at arin.net > Subject: [arin-announce] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable > Voting for ARIN Elections > > The Board of Trustees maintains authority over the scope, mission, and > along with the President and Chief Executive Officer establishes ARIN?s > strategic direction and fiscal oversight. The Board also has oversight > authority of the nomination, appointment, and election of individuals to > Board committees and similar roles. > > Over the past two years, as part of its fiduciary duties, the ARIN Board of > Trustees (?Board?) has undertaken a review of ARIN?s governance > structures, including the voting system for ARIN elections. As part of this > effort, an independent, outside consultant was engaged to review ARIN?s > governance structures and provide recommendations. > > One recommendation that has arisen from this governance review is to > replace the current first-past-the-post (FPTP) voting system with single > transferrable voting (STV), also known as ranked-choice voting. STV would > provide the ability for the community to realize the following primary > benefits: > > ? Greater voting choice. Voters rank candidates in order of preference; > ? A more proportional result. Successful candidates more broadly represent > voter sentiment versus a single issue. There is better representation of > member minority views; > ? No wasted votes. Fewer votes are cast for losing candidates or needlessly > cast for run-away winners; > ? Designed for multiple winners; and > ? Reduced opportunities for tactical voting. > > STV has some disadvantages: > > ? It is possible for a single candidate to win without crossing the winning > threshold; > ? The process is more complicated to understand and implement than FPTP; > and > ? In some cases, ballots that don't rank all candidates may be discarded. > > We feel the benefits above outweigh the disadvantages. STV is currently > being used by RIPE. > > Board Proposal: > > ARIN will use an online, fully electronic STV system for ARIN elections. > > The nomination process existing at the time of implementation will be used. > Modifications to the nomination process to implement STV are expected to > be minimal. > > ARIN seeks community feedback on this proposed use of the STV system for > ARIN elections and the required amendments to ARIN's Articles of > Incorporation and Bylaws. This consultation will remain open for 30 days: > https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/202 > 2-1/ > > ? Changes to Articles of Incorporation: > https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/202 > 2_1__STV_ExhibitA.pdf > > ? Redline changes to ARIN Bylaws: > https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/202 > 2_1__STV_ExhibitB.pdf > > Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to > this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. > > Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 7 February 2022. > > Regards, > > John Curran > President and CEO > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Announce > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Announce Mailing List (ARIN-announce at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-announce > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. From chris at semihuman.com Thu Jan 6 13:44:56 2022 From: chris at semihuman.com (Chris Woodfield) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2022 10:44:56 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Adam beat me to it - I?m fully in support of the adoption of STV/RCV, but it really should be spelled out in the bylaws, at least in principle. The question then becomes - how detailed must the bylaws be in describing the system? -C > On Jan 6, 2022, at 10:37 AM, Adam Thompson wrote: > > Anything is better than first-past-the-post, as a general rule. I don't mind STV as described *informally* in the Consultation document. > > However, the amendments are so short on details that I would be opposed to this, as presented right now. > > The Articles change enables other approaches, nothing more. Then the Bylaws change simply... enables other approaches. > I'm not seeing any changes that even allude to STV. As written, I could be voting for an amendment that enables ARIN to make someone Benevolent Dictator for Life! > > As those Wendy's commercials made so famous a few decades ago, "Where's the meat?" > > -Adam > > Adam Thompson > Consultant, Infrastructure Services > MERLIN > 100 - 135 Innovation Drive > Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 > (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) > athompson at merlin.mb.ca > www.merlin.mb.ca > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ARIN-announce On Behalf Of >> ARIN >> Sent: Thursday, January 6, 2022 10:39 AM >> To: arin-announce at arin.net >> Subject: [arin-announce] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable >> Voting for ARIN Elections >> >> The Board of Trustees maintains authority over the scope, mission, and >> along with the President and Chief Executive Officer establishes ARIN?s >> strategic direction and fiscal oversight. The Board also has oversight >> authority of the nomination, appointment, and election of individuals to >> Board committees and similar roles. >> >> Over the past two years, as part of its fiduciary duties, the ARIN Board of >> Trustees (?Board?) has undertaken a review of ARIN?s governance >> structures, including the voting system for ARIN elections. As part of this >> effort, an independent, outside consultant was engaged to review ARIN?s >> governance structures and provide recommendations. >> >> One recommendation that has arisen from this governance review is to >> replace the current first-past-the-post (FPTP) voting system with single >> transferrable voting (STV), also known as ranked-choice voting. STV would >> provide the ability for the community to realize the following primary >> benefits: >> >> ? Greater voting choice. Voters rank candidates in order of preference; >> ? A more proportional result. Successful candidates more broadly represent >> voter sentiment versus a single issue. There is better representation of >> member minority views; >> ? No wasted votes. Fewer votes are cast for losing candidates or needlessly >> cast for run-away winners; >> ? Designed for multiple winners; and >> ? Reduced opportunities for tactical voting. >> >> STV has some disadvantages: >> >> ? It is possible for a single candidate to win without crossing the winning >> threshold; >> ? The process is more complicated to understand and implement than FPTP; >> and >> ? In some cases, ballots that don't rank all candidates may be discarded. >> >> We feel the benefits above outweigh the disadvantages. STV is currently >> being used by RIPE. >> >> Board Proposal: >> >> ARIN will use an online, fully electronic STV system for ARIN elections. >> >> The nomination process existing at the time of implementation will be used. >> Modifications to the nomination process to implement STV are expected to >> be minimal. >> >> ARIN seeks community feedback on this proposed use of the STV system for >> ARIN elections and the required amendments to ARIN's Articles of >> Incorporation and Bylaws. This consultation will remain open for 30 days: >> https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/202 >> 2-1/ >> >> ? Changes to Articles of Incorporation: >> https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/202 >> 2_1__STV_ExhibitA.pdf >> >> ? Redline changes to ARIN Bylaws: >> https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/202 >> 2_1__STV_ExhibitB.pdf >> >> Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to >> this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. >> >> Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 7 February 2022. >> >> Regards, >> >> John Curran >> President and CEO >> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ARIN-Announce >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >> the ARIN Announce Mailing List (ARIN-announce at arin.net). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-announce >> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Consult > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing > List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services > Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. From owen at delong.com Thu Jan 6 14:01:36 2022 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2022 11:01:36 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> I think that the best thing would be for the bylaws to call out a separate document, incorporated by reference which defines the STV process and that the bylaws should simply specify that voting shall be conducted by a Single Transferrable Vote process as documented at location. That allows appropriate documentation control over the process without the weight of a full bylaw amendment. Owen > On Jan 6, 2022, at 10:44 , Chris Woodfield wrote: > > Adam beat me to it - I?m fully in support of the adoption of STV/RCV, but it really should be spelled out in the bylaws, at least in principle. > > The question then becomes - how detailed must the bylaws be in describing the system? > > -C > >> On Jan 6, 2022, at 10:37 AM, Adam Thompson wrote: >> >> Anything is better than first-past-the-post, as a general rule. I don't mind STV as described *informally* in the Consultation document. >> >> However, the amendments are so short on details that I would be opposed to this, as presented right now. >> >> The Articles change enables other approaches, nothing more. Then the Bylaws change simply... enables other approaches. >> I'm not seeing any changes that even allude to STV. As written, I could be voting for an amendment that enables ARIN to make someone Benevolent Dictator for Life! >> >> As those Wendy's commercials made so famous a few decades ago, "Where's the meat?" >> >> -Adam >> >> Adam Thompson >> Consultant, Infrastructure Services >> MERLIN >> 100 - 135 Innovation Drive >> Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 >> (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) >> athompson at merlin.mb.ca >> www.merlin.mb.ca >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: ARIN-announce On Behalf Of >>> ARIN >>> Sent: Thursday, January 6, 2022 10:39 AM >>> To: arin-announce at arin.net >>> Subject: [arin-announce] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable >>> Voting for ARIN Elections >>> >>> The Board of Trustees maintains authority over the scope, mission, and >>> along with the President and Chief Executive Officer establishes ARIN?s >>> strategic direction and fiscal oversight. The Board also has oversight >>> authority of the nomination, appointment, and election of individuals to >>> Board committees and similar roles. >>> >>> Over the past two years, as part of its fiduciary duties, the ARIN Board of >>> Trustees (?Board?) has undertaken a review of ARIN?s governance >>> structures, including the voting system for ARIN elections. As part of this >>> effort, an independent, outside consultant was engaged to review ARIN?s >>> governance structures and provide recommendations. >>> >>> One recommendation that has arisen from this governance review is to >>> replace the current first-past-the-post (FPTP) voting system with single >>> transferrable voting (STV), also known as ranked-choice voting. STV would >>> provide the ability for the community to realize the following primary >>> benefits: >>> >>> ? Greater voting choice. Voters rank candidates in order of preference; >>> ? A more proportional result. Successful candidates more broadly represent >>> voter sentiment versus a single issue. There is better representation of >>> member minority views; >>> ? No wasted votes. Fewer votes are cast for losing candidates or needlessly >>> cast for run-away winners; >>> ? Designed for multiple winners; and >>> ? Reduced opportunities for tactical voting. >>> >>> STV has some disadvantages: >>> >>> ? It is possible for a single candidate to win without crossing the winning >>> threshold; >>> ? The process is more complicated to understand and implement than FPTP; >>> and >>> ? In some cases, ballots that don't rank all candidates may be discarded. >>> >>> We feel the benefits above outweigh the disadvantages. STV is currently >>> being used by RIPE. >>> >>> Board Proposal: >>> >>> ARIN will use an online, fully electronic STV system for ARIN elections. >>> >>> The nomination process existing at the time of implementation will be used. >>> Modifications to the nomination process to implement STV are expected to >>> be minimal. >>> >>> ARIN seeks community feedback on this proposed use of the STV system for >>> ARIN elections and the required amendments to ARIN's Articles of >>> Incorporation and Bylaws. This consultation will remain open for 30 days: >>> https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/202 >>> 2-1/ >>> >>> ? Changes to Articles of Incorporation: >>> https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/202 >>> 2_1__STV_ExhibitA.pdf >>> >>> ? Redline changes to ARIN Bylaws: >>> https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/202 >>> 2_1__STV_ExhibitB.pdf >>> >>> Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to >>> this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. >>> >>> Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 7 February 2022. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> John Curran >>> President and CEO >>> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ARIN-Announce >>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >>> the ARIN Announce Mailing List (ARIN-announce at arin.net). >>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-announce >>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. >> _______________________________________________ >> ARIN-Consult >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing >> List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services >> Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Consult > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing > List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services > Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. From owen at delong.com Thu Jan 6 14:01:51 2022 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2022 11:01:51 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <23C27627-622A-4FB5-9553-1DDF1E7FA6BB@delong.com> To be clear, I also support a change to STV. Owen > On Jan 6, 2022, at 10:44 , Chris Woodfield wrote: > > Adam beat me to it - I?m fully in support of the adoption of STV/RCV, but it really should be spelled out in the bylaws, at least in principle. > > The question then becomes - how detailed must the bylaws be in describing the system? > > -C > >> On Jan 6, 2022, at 10:37 AM, Adam Thompson wrote: >> >> Anything is better than first-past-the-post, as a general rule. I don't mind STV as described *informally* in the Consultation document. >> >> However, the amendments are so short on details that I would be opposed to this, as presented right now. >> >> The Articles change enables other approaches, nothing more. Then the Bylaws change simply... enables other approaches. >> I'm not seeing any changes that even allude to STV. As written, I could be voting for an amendment that enables ARIN to make someone Benevolent Dictator for Life! >> >> As those Wendy's commercials made so famous a few decades ago, "Where's the meat?" >> >> -Adam >> >> Adam Thompson >> Consultant, Infrastructure Services >> MERLIN >> 100 - 135 Innovation Drive >> Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 >> (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) >> athompson at merlin.mb.ca >> www.merlin.mb.ca >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: ARIN-announce On Behalf Of >>> ARIN >>> Sent: Thursday, January 6, 2022 10:39 AM >>> To: arin-announce at arin.net >>> Subject: [arin-announce] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable >>> Voting for ARIN Elections >>> >>> The Board of Trustees maintains authority over the scope, mission, and >>> along with the President and Chief Executive Officer establishes ARIN?s >>> strategic direction and fiscal oversight. The Board also has oversight >>> authority of the nomination, appointment, and election of individuals to >>> Board committees and similar roles. >>> >>> Over the past two years, as part of its fiduciary duties, the ARIN Board of >>> Trustees (?Board?) has undertaken a review of ARIN?s governance >>> structures, including the voting system for ARIN elections. As part of this >>> effort, an independent, outside consultant was engaged to review ARIN?s >>> governance structures and provide recommendations. >>> >>> One recommendation that has arisen from this governance review is to >>> replace the current first-past-the-post (FPTP) voting system with single >>> transferrable voting (STV), also known as ranked-choice voting. STV would >>> provide the ability for the community to realize the following primary >>> benefits: >>> >>> ? Greater voting choice. Voters rank candidates in order of preference; >>> ? A more proportional result. Successful candidates more broadly represent >>> voter sentiment versus a single issue. There is better representation of >>> member minority views; >>> ? No wasted votes. Fewer votes are cast for losing candidates or needlessly >>> cast for run-away winners; >>> ? Designed for multiple winners; and >>> ? Reduced opportunities for tactical voting. >>> >>> STV has some disadvantages: >>> >>> ? It is possible for a single candidate to win without crossing the winning >>> threshold; >>> ? The process is more complicated to understand and implement than FPTP; >>> and >>> ? In some cases, ballots that don't rank all candidates may be discarded. >>> >>> We feel the benefits above outweigh the disadvantages. STV is currently >>> being used by RIPE. >>> >>> Board Proposal: >>> >>> ARIN will use an online, fully electronic STV system for ARIN elections. >>> >>> The nomination process existing at the time of implementation will be used. >>> Modifications to the nomination process to implement STV are expected to >>> be minimal. >>> >>> ARIN seeks community feedback on this proposed use of the STV system for >>> ARIN elections and the required amendments to ARIN's Articles of >>> Incorporation and Bylaws. This consultation will remain open for 30 days: >>> https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/202 >>> 2-1/ >>> >>> ? Changes to Articles of Incorporation: >>> https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/202 >>> 2_1__STV_ExhibitA.pdf >>> >>> ? Redline changes to ARIN Bylaws: >>> https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2022/202 >>> 2_1__STV_ExhibitB.pdf >>> >>> Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to >>> this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. >>> >>> Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 7 February 2022. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> John Curran >>> President and CEO >>> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ARIN-Announce >>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >>> the ARIN Announce Mailing List (ARIN-announce at arin.net). >>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-announce >>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. >> _______________________________________________ >> ARIN-Consult >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing >> List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services >> Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Consult > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing > List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services > Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. From alan at peak.org Thu Jan 6 14:25:22 2022 From: alan at peak.org (Alan Batie) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2022 11:25:22 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 1/6/22 10:37 AM, Adam Thompson wrote: > Anything is better than first-past-the-post, as a general rule. I agree; Ranked Choice is definitely the way to go, and yeah, details should be spelled out. From jcurran at arin.net Thu Jan 6 14:29:34 2022 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2022 19:29:34 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> Message-ID: <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> > On 6 Jan 2022, at 11:01 AM, Owen DeLong via ARIN-consult wrote: > > I think that the best thing would be for the bylaws to call out a separate document, incorporated by reference > which defines the STV process and that the bylaws should simply specify that voting shall be conducted > by a Single Transferrable Vote process as documented at location. > > That allows appropriate documentation control over the process without the weight of a full bylaw amendment. Some additional context on the proposed changes may help here ? At present ARIN elections are conducted per the "ARIN Election Processes? which are adopted by the Board and published on the ARIN website as required by the ARIN Bylaws. Ideally, ARIN would have been able to move to a Single-Transferrable-Vote (STV) election process by simply adopting a revised set of ARIN Election Processes specifying such, but alas the Virginia Non-stock Corporation Act requires that "directors be elected by majority of votes cast" unless otherwise specified in the Articles of Incorporation. The proposed change to the Articles of Incorporation would allow the Bylaws to provide for election in a manner other than ?majority of votes cast? ? such as an updated set of ARIN Election Processes that specify STV. We did not put the exact election system in the proposed Bylaws change (as the Bylaws are quite sparse on election processes with these instead being contained in the ARIN Election Processes) and continuing that approach would allow for any necessary refinement of the particulars of the election process without having to further revise the bylaws. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers From athompso at athompso.net Thu Jan 6 14:31:47 2022 From: athompso at athompso.net (Adam Thompson) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2022 19:31:47 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: I think the bylaws should at least specify the kind of voting system. Changing from STV to something else should require at least a bylaw amendment. That would probably also add enough specificity to address my concern. -Adam Get Outlook for Android ________________________________ From: ARIN-consult on behalf of John Curran Sent: Thursday, January 6, 2022 1:29:34 PM To: Owen DeLong Cc: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > On 6 Jan 2022, at 11:01 AM, Owen DeLong via ARIN-consult wrote: > > I think that the best thing would be for the bylaws to call out a separate document, incorporated by reference > which defines the STV process and that the bylaws should simply specify that voting shall be conducted > by a Single Transferrable Vote process as documented at location. > > That allows appropriate documentation control over the process without the weight of a full bylaw amendment. Some additional context on the proposed changes may help here ? At present ARIN elections are conducted per the "ARIN Election Processes? which are adopted by the Board and published on the ARIN website as required by the ARIN Bylaws. Ideally, ARIN would have been able to move to a Single-Transferrable-Vote (STV) election process by simply adopting a revised set of ARIN Election Processes specifying such, but alas the Virginia Non-stock Corporation Act requires that "directors be elected by majority of votes cast" unless otherwise specified in the Articles of Incorporation. The proposed change to the Articles of Incorporation would allow the Bylaws to provide for election in a manner other than ?majority of votes cast? ? such as an updated set of ARIN Election Processes that specify STV. We did not put the exact election system in the proposed Bylaws change (as the Bylaws are quite sparse on election processes with these instead being contained in the ARIN Election Processes) and continuing that approach would allow for any necessary refinement of the particulars of the election process without having to further revise the bylaws. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bill at herrin.us Thu Jan 6 14:55:56 2022 From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2022 11:55:56 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: <2FCA5AFC-4D90-4E61-8F07-067034783156@arin.net> References: <2FCA5AFC-4D90-4E61-8F07-067034783156@arin.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 8:38 AM ARIN wrote: > One recommendation that has arisen from this governance review is to replace the current first-past-the-post (FPTP) voting system with single transferrable voting (STV), also known as ranked-choice voting. STV would provide the ability for the community to realize the following primary benefits: > > ? Greater voting choice. Voters rank candidates in order of preference; > ? A more proportional result. Successful candidates more broadly represent voter sentiment versus a single issue. There is better representation of member minority views; > ? No wasted votes. Fewer votes are cast for losing candidates or needlessly cast for run-away winners; > ? Designed for multiple winners; and > ? Reduced opportunities for tactical voting. > > STV has some disadvantages: > > ? It is possible for a single candidate to win without crossing the winning threshold; > ? The process is more complicated to understand and implement than FPTP; and > ? In some cases, ballots that don't rank all candidates may be discarded. Though unlikely, it is mathematically possible for the folks who receive the most first-round votes to all lose the election while the second-to-last candidates win. It's also possible for the candidate ranked LAST by a majority of voters to win election. Suppose you have five candidates for two positions. The votes are: 30% 1, 3, 2, 5, 4 20% 3, 1, 2, 5, 4 19% 4, 1, 2, 5, 3 10.5% 2, 3, 1, 5, 4 10.5% 2, 4, 1, 5, 3 5% 5, 4, 1, 2, 3 5% 5, 3, 1, 2, 4 In the first pass, one receives 30%, two receives 21%, three receives 20%, four receives 19% and five receives 10%. Candidate five is eliminated. 5% of candidate 5's second choice was candidate 4. The other half was candidate 3. In the second pass, one has 30%, two has 21%, three has 25% and four has 24%. Candidate two is eliminated. Candidate 2's second choices were again split half and half between candidates 3 and 4. In the third pass, one has 30%, three has 35.5% and four has 34.5%. Now the peculiarity of STV versus ordinary ranked choice voting comes into play. Candidate 3 has exceeded the election threshold so his "excess" votes are distributed to the other candidates. Let's say the excess is 1%. The next choice for everybody now in the candidate 3 bucket is candidate 1, so all of that excess goes to candidate 1. In the final pass, one has 31%, three has 34.5% and four has 34.5%. Candidates 3 (originally 20%) and 4 (originally 19%) are elected, between them having received less than half the first-round vote. Note that elected candidate 4 was ranked LAST by a majority 65.5% of the voters. FPTP uses the same numbers above except voters cast a vote for both of their first two picks, that is: 30% 1, 3 20% 3, 1 19% 4, 1 10.5% 2, 3 10.5% 2, 4 5% 5, 4 5% 5, 3 This results in: 69% 1 (elected) 65.5% 3 (elected) 34.5% 4 21% 2 10% 5 A simple plurality vote would use only the first choices: 30% 1 20% 3 19% 4 10.5% 2 10.5% 2 5% 5 5% 5 For a total of 30% 1, 21% 2, 20% 3, 19% 4 and 10% 5 electing candidates 1 and 2 who between them achieve a majority of the votes. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ From rlaager at wiktel.com Thu Jan 6 15:18:48 2022 From: rlaager at wiktel.com (Richard Laager) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2022 14:18:48 -0600 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <2FCA5AFC-4D90-4E61-8F07-067034783156@arin.net> Message-ID: On 1/6/22 1:55 PM, William Herrin wrote: > On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 8:38 AM ARIN wrote: >> One recommendation that has arisen from this governance review is to replace the current first-past-the-post (FPTP) voting system with single transferrable voting (STV), also known as ranked-choice voting. Yes, please. FPTP is the worst. > or needlessly cast for run-away winners; Does this imply an STV variant where surplus votes are transferred, as discussed below? > In the third pass, one has 30%, three has 35.5% and four has 34.5%. > Now the peculiarity of STV versus ordinary ranked choice voting comes > into play. Candidate 3 has exceeded the election threshold Wikipedia says that once someone reaches the quota (which I think is Bill's "election threshold"), they are declared elected. In a two-seat election, I think that threshold would be 33.3% (plus one vote), so candidates three and four have crossed it. They are both elected, and since both seats are filled, the process stops. (Your example arrived at the same result, though.) It should only be necessary to distribute excess/surplus votes if only one candidate had passed the threshold and there were still more candidates than seats. > so his > "excess" votes are distributed to the other candidates. According to Wikipedia, only some definitions of STV transfer excess/surplus votes. And there are different ways to transfer the surplus votes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote#Transfers_of_surplus_votes I don't have strong feelings about those details. But whatever ARIN is adopting does need to be clearly specified somewhere. -- Richard From bill at herrin.us Thu Jan 6 15:25:01 2022 From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2022 12:25:01 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <2FCA5AFC-4D90-4E61-8F07-067034783156@arin.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 12:18 PM Richard Laager wrote: > Does this imply an STV variant where surplus votes are transferred, as > discussed below? > > On 1/6/22 1:55 PM, William Herrin wrote: > > In the third pass, one has 30%, three has 35.5% and four has 34.5%. > > Now the peculiarity of STV versus ordinary ranked choice voting comes > > into play. Candidate 3 has exceeded the election threshold > > Wikipedia says that once someone reaches the quota (which I think is > Bill's "election threshold"), they are declared elected. In a two-seat > election, I think that threshold would be 33.3% (plus one vote), so > candidates three and four have crossed it. They are both elected, and > since both seats are filled, the process stops. (Your example arrived at > the same result, though.) The surplus vote thing is super fuzzy to me so I could easily have gotten that part wrong in my example. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ From athompson at merlin.mb.ca Thu Jan 6 22:45:55 2022 From: athompson at merlin.mb.ca (Adam Thompson) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 03:45:55 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: John (et al.), the (admittedly so far very small) consensus we've seen today is "Hell, Yeah! Let's change the voting model", but I think everyone who spoke up today had approximately the same concern: at least _something_ a little more explicit needs to be put into the bylaws, or in a supporting document the bylaws _explicitly_ reference. After a day's thought on this, although I very much want to get rid of FPTP everywhere I can - I think it's fundamentally broken - I am absolutely NOT OK with supporting the changes *as currently written*. I wasn't really OK with it earlier, but the longer I think about it and the more times I review it, the more opposed I am. I feel that it reduces protections and opens up new possibilities for malicious actors to (somehow) subvert the intent in the future, without putting even the most trivial of protections, assurances, whatever you want to call them, back in to either the Articles or the Bylaws. I already suggested one tiny change that would make me happy (referencing the voting model in the Bylaws); I won't attempt to condense everyone else's opinion on what needs to change into a single paragraph. Great idea, not so hot implementation IMO. PLEASE revisit the changes and re-propose, I don't want this change in voting model to evaporate. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services MERLIN 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca > -----Original Message----- > From: ARIN-consult On Behalf Of John > Curran > Sent: Thursday, January 6, 2022 1:30 PM > To: Owen DeLong > Cc: arin-consult at arin.net > Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single > Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > > > On 6 Jan 2022, at 11:01 AM, Owen DeLong via ARIN-consult consult at arin.net> wrote: > > > > I think that the best thing would be for the bylaws to call out a separate > document, incorporated by reference > > which defines the STV process and that the bylaws should simply specify > that voting shall be conducted > > by a Single Transferrable Vote process as documented at location. > > > > That allows appropriate documentation control over the process without > the weight of a full bylaw amendment. > > Some additional context on the proposed changes may help here ? > > At present ARIN elections are conducted per the "ARIN Election Processes? > which > are adopted by the Board and published on the ARIN website as required by > the ARIN Bylaws. Ideally, ARIN would have been able to move to a Single- > Transferrable-Vote (STV) election process by simply adopting a revised set > of ARIN Election Processes specifying such, but alas the Virginia Non-stock > Corporation Act requires that "directors be elected by majority of votes > cast" unless otherwise specified in the Articles of Incorporation. > > The proposed change to the Articles of Incorporation would allow the > Bylaws to provide for election in a manner other than ?majority of votes > cast? ? such as an updated set of ARIN Election Processes that specify STV. > We did not put the exact election system in the proposed Bylaws change (as > the Bylaws are quite sparse on election processes with these instead being > contained in the ARIN Election Processes) and continuing that approach > would allow for any necessary refinement of the particulars of the election > process without having to further revise the bylaws. > > Thanks, > /John > > John Curran > President and CEO > American Registry for Internet Numbers > > > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Consult > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN > Consult Mailing > List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN > Member Services > Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. From owen at delong.com Fri Jan 7 12:15:57 2022 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 09:15:57 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: > On Jan 6, 2022, at 11:29 , John Curran wrote: > > >> On 6 Jan 2022, at 11:01 AM, Owen DeLong via ARIN-consult wrote: >> >> I think that the best thing would be for the bylaws to call out a separate document, incorporated by reference >> which defines the STV process and that the bylaws should simply specify that voting shall be conducted >> by a Single Transferrable Vote process as documented at location. >> >> That allows appropriate documentation control over the process without the weight of a full bylaw amendment. > > Some additional context on the proposed changes may help here ? > > At present ARIN elections are conducted per the "ARIN Election Processes? which are adopted by the Board and published on the ARIN website as required by the ARIN Bylaws. Ideally, ARIN would have been able to move to a Single-Transferrable-Vote (STV) election process by simply adopting a revised set of ARIN Election Processes specifying such, but alas the Virginia Non-stock Corporation Act requires that "directors be elected by majority of votes cast" unless otherwise specified in the Articles of Incorporation. > > The proposed change to the Articles of Incorporation would allow the Bylaws to provide for election in a manner other than ?majority of votes cast? ? such as an updated set of ARIN Election Processes that specify STV. We did not put the exact election system in the proposed Bylaws change (as the Bylaws are quite sparse on election processes with these instead being contained in the ARIN Election Processes) and continuing that approach would allow for any necessary refinement of the particulars of the election process without having to further revise the bylaws. > > Thanks, > /John > > John Curran > President and CEO > American Registry for Internet Numbers > > > That?s all well and good and in keeping with what I suggested. However, I think if you want to seek community approval for a proposal, then the proposed modification to the processes should also be put somewhere for the community to review and that the community should be allowed to consider them as a package. Obviously, the change should require a vote of the members (changing the articles of incorporation), correct? Currently, the membership is able to have faith that the board will not unilaterally move away from majority election of directors because Virginia law forbids it without a change to the articles of incorporation that they would have to approve. The blanket language proposed in the current change, however, would allow the board to adopt any process it so chooses at any time without being subject to review of the membership. I think many, myself included, would like to see some level of check and balance requiring membership and/or community involvement and consideration in changing the election process(es) rather than writing a blank check for the board to do whatever it likes in this regard. Owen From owen at delong.com Fri Jan 7 12:25:30 2022 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 09:25:30 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <2FCA5AFC-4D90-4E61-8F07-067034783156@arin.net> Message-ID: <595C98DD-12CC-43B1-97C4-4420A9B83068@delong.com> > On Jan 6, 2022, at 11:55 , William Herrin wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 8:38 AM ARIN wrote: >> One recommendation that has arisen from this governance review is to replace the current first-past-the-post (FPTP) voting system with single transferrable voting (STV), also known as ranked-choice voting. STV would provide the ability for the community to realize the following primary benefits: >> >> ? Greater voting choice. Voters rank candidates in order of preference; >> ? A more proportional result. Successful candidates more broadly represent voter sentiment versus a single issue. There is better representation of member minority views; >> ? No wasted votes. Fewer votes are cast for losing candidates or needlessly cast for run-away winners; >> ? Designed for multiple winners; and >> ? Reduced opportunities for tactical voting. >> >> STV has some disadvantages: >> >> ? It is possible for a single candidate to win without crossing the winning threshold; >> ? The process is more complicated to understand and implement than FPTP; and >> ? In some cases, ballots that don't rank all candidates may be discarded. > > Though unlikely, it is mathematically possible for the folks who > receive the most first-round votes to all lose the election while the > second-to-last candidates win. It's also possible for the candidate > ranked LAST by a majority of voters to win election. You say this as if it is necessarily a bad outcome. I?m not convinced that everyone?s last choice is any worse than a minority?s first choice. (what you propose is not possible if a majority voted for said first choice). In most cases, STV will yield a result more reflective of the community?s overall desires. Yes, you can cite corner cases where a potentially objectionable result can be obtained, but they are actually somewhat difficult to contrive. As you note, there are alternative RCV options that lack this particular anomaly, but they present others. Overall, I?m fine with most of the RCV options available, but generally prefer STV as its mechanics have been well studied and its results have proven to generally provide a superior result where it has been implemented. This is not to say that unlikely and pathological elections do not occur. (2016 U.S. Federal comes to mind). The sad part there is that to a large extent, that was the result of the pro-slavery provisions in the constitution doing almost exactly what they were intended to do. Owen From jcurran at arin.net Fri Jan 7 12:37:30 2022 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 17:37:30 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: On 7 Jan 2022, at 9:15 AM, Owen DeLong > wrote: ... Currently, the membership is able to have faith that the board will not unilaterally move away from majority election of directors because Virginia law forbids it without a change to the articles of incorporation that they would have to approve. The blanket language proposed in the current change, however, would allow the board to adopt any process it so chooses at any time without being subject to review of the membership. I think many, myself included, would like to see some level of check and balance requiring membership and/or community involvement and consideration in changing the election process(es) rather than writing a blank check for the board to do whatever it likes in this regard. Owen - For clarity, I?d like to address the question you raise about Board latitude in ARIN election processes, as that is a topic that is not actually addressed by the present consultation. Yes, the membership can rest assured under the present Articles and Bylaws that plurality voting will be used, but the remainder of the ARIN Election Processes are entirely under the control of the ARIN Board of Trustees with nominal constraints given in ARIN Bylaws; i.e. the present Articles and Bylaws provide the Board of Trustees rather generous latitude in establishment of the Election processes and already the Bylaws substantially allow "the board to adopt any process it so chooses at any time without being subject to review of the membership" The proposed Article and Bylaws change in the consultation does not change this latitude in a material manner, other than opening up the possible use of a STV voting system rather than the Virginia default of plurality. I understand that you?re suggesting that there should be much less Board latitude in establishing of ARIN?s Election Processes, but to some extent that is an orthogonal question to whether the ARIN Board be allowed to adopt election processes that specify STV voting model. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From peter at colovore.com Fri Jan 7 12:50:57 2022 From: peter at colovore.com (Peter Harrison) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 09:50:57 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: Dear Community, The aim of the consultation is to address some shortcomings in our existing system. This note is to provide some background about the rationale for the proposal for those who may not be aware of STV. Specific answers related to the questions on this mailing list will come soon. Currently, with a large slate of candidates there is a meaningful possibility that one or more persons could win with less than 50% of the vote. Surpassing the 50% threshold is often considered a clear mandate with FPTP. STV is designed for multi-winner elections where candidates are ranked in order of preference. This allows you to get a better picture of the overall sentiment of the electorate while ameliorating the minority rule shortcoming. There are disadvantages, some of which are shared with our existing system. For example, it is possible to win without passing the voting threshold, but it?s limited to a single candidate. This can occur amongst a crowded field of alternative choices after the primary choices are selected. A disadvantage that STV doesn?t share with FPTP is that it is more complicated due to the rankings and a different definition of the threshold. The consultation document provides other comparison criteria. No voting system will meet all desired goals, however we wanted to investigate the appetite for the additional benefits and the degree to which they outweigh the disadvantages in the eyes of the voting membership. So, what is STV? The consultation document tries to summarize the evaluation of many sources of data. Wikipedia is a rich repository, however before starting your research there, I?d recommend looking at these very short youtube video tutorials: 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI 2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac9070OIMUg You will find that most online sources of voting system analysis will focus on political party based systems, which differ from our context, but will be insightful. 1. This link provides a compact evaluation matrix table of major voting systems: https://www.dprvoting.org/System_Comparison.htm 2. This link provides a detailed, though accessible, single page comparison: https://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/esd/esd02/esd02d/esd02d01 We are not unique in wanting to assess more equitable, party-agnostic, multi-winner voting systems. RIPE uses an STV system and was consulted as part of our research. NANOG is making preliminary evaluations. It is possible to create many scenarios that test the limits of STV and FPTP systems. I encourage you to consider their likelihood in our situation and discount them accordingly. Please remember the overall goal of creating greater equity using a globally deployed system designed by psephology thought leaders. ARIN members provide services to 29 nations and territories with over 370 million inhabitants generating over 21 trillion USD in annual GDP. The gravity of this governance consultation must be considered in this context. Peter -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From peter at colovore.com Fri Jan 7 12:53:11 2022 From: peter at colovore.com (Peter Harrison) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 09:53:11 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: Dear Community, With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones may be invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one method. This link explains some of the options: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods We will need to balance the range of options with those provided by current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. Investigations are being made by staff and they will make recommendations to the board based on their research into our needs, best practices, practicability, relative merit, legal implications and systems availability. The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this is a good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we are working in the best interest of the members and the region they serve when evaluating the choices presented. As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate multiple forms of voting that may be required in future. The concern that this could lead to opportunistic changes to systems each election cycle is sound. We will investigate ways to ensure this does not happen with possible bylaw wording to meet these and other goals. The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a workable solution and concern for the membership has been evident every step of the way. These consultations are the result of over two years of research and were not taken lightly. We will continue to work to maintain this excellent collaboration. Thank you for your feedback. Peter -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From athompson at merlin.mb.ca Fri Jan 7 12:55:03 2022 From: athompson at merlin.mb.ca (Adam Thompson) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 17:55:03 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: I get your point? but that?s a bug, not a feature. What you?ve described below is precisely the problem we?re now noticing, or becoming aware of. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult On Behalf Of John Curran Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:38 AM To: Owen DeLong Cc: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections On 7 Jan 2022, at 9:15 AM, Owen DeLong > wrote: ... Currently, the membership is able to have faith that the board will not unilaterally move away from majority election of directors because Virginia law forbids it without a change to the articles of incorporation that they would have to approve. The blanket language proposed in the current change, however, would allow the board to adopt any process it so chooses at any time without being subject to review of the membership. I think many, myself included, would like to see some level of check and balance requiring membership and/or community involvement and consideration in changing the election process(es) rather than writing a blank check for the board to do whatever it likes in this regard. Owen - For clarity, I?d like to address the question you raise about Board latitude in ARIN election processes, as that is a topic that is not actually addressed by the present consultation. Yes, the membership can rest assured under the present Articles and Bylaws that plurality voting will be used, but the remainder of the ARIN Election Processes are entirely under the control of the ARIN Board of Trustees with nominal constraints given in ARIN Bylaws; i.e. the present Articles and Bylaws provide the Board of Trustees rather generous latitude in establishment of the Election processes and already the Bylaws substantially allow "the board to adopt any process it so chooses at any time without being subject to review of the membership" The proposed Article and Bylaws change in the consultation does not change this latitude in a material manner, other than opening up the possible use of a STV voting system rather than the Virginia default of plurality. I understand that you?re suggesting that there should be much less Board latitude in establishing of ARIN?s Election Processes, but to some extent that is an orthogonal question to whether the ARIN Board be allowed to adopt election processes that specify STV voting model. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 2687 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From athompson at merlin.mb.ca Fri Jan 7 13:03:43 2022 From: athompson at merlin.mb.ca (Adam Thompson) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 18:03:43 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: Peter, I don?t have a problem with STV. I do have a problem with the board having the latitude ? unfettered ? to keep changing voting systems without further bylaw amendments. The type of voting structure, particularly when deviating from the norm that?s baked into Virginia law, should then be baked into the bylaws so that it can?t change in the middle of the night, perhaps even during an election. Do I trust the current board to not pull stuff like that? Yeah, probably, I think... (In fact, can I even name the current board members? No. But that?s a different problem.) Am I willing to blindly trust every future board that might exist? Absolutely not. I?ve seen how boards can be co-opted, infiltrated, and/or ?turned to the dark side? (so to speak) elsewhere. As far as the consultation?s goal to determine whether STV is OK or not? Yes, it is good. This is an excellent move overall. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult On Behalf Of Peter Harrison Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:53 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Dear Community, With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones may be invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one method. This link explains some of the options: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods We will need to balance the range of options with those provided by current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. Investigations are being made by staff and they will make recommendations to the board based on their research into our needs, best practices, practicability, relative merit, legal implications and systems availability. The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this is a good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we are working in the best interest of the members and the region they serve when evaluating the choices presented. As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate multiple forms of voting that may be required in future. The concern that this could lead to opportunistic changes to systems each election cycle is sound. We will investigate ways to ensure this does not happen with possible bylaw wording to meet these and other goals. The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a workable solution and concern for the membership has been evident every step of the way. These consultations are the result of over two years of research and were not taken lightly. We will continue to work to maintain this excellent collaboration. Thank you for your feedback. Peter -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 2687 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From ronald.v.dasilva at gmail.com Fri Jan 7 13:04:29 2022 From: ronald.v.dasilva at gmail.com (Ron da Silva) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 13:04:29 -0500 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7361FF48-97E2-48FD-B4B8-574C83B32DA1@gmail.com> I wanted to briefly commend Peter and the GWG for putting this forward.. it was discussed as a potential improvement in the election process back in MSP and I support the change. -ron From jcurran at arin.net Fri Jan 7 13:05:37 2022 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 18:05:37 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: Adam - Yes, one could consider it a bug or a feature, depending on perspective. It is, however, not the question being asked of the consultation, which rather seeks to ask ?Should the ARIN Board of Trustees be able to specify use of the non-plurality model of STV for ARIN elections, including necessary changes to the Articles and Bylaws to allow that?? (I have no objection to more specific constraints on ARIN election processes in the Bylaws, but would suggest that such be done only to enshrine a successful approach that?s been proven after several years of operating experience...) Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 7 Jan 2022, at 9:55 AM, Adam Thompson > wrote: I get your point? but that?s a bug, not a feature. What you?ve described below is precisely the problem we?re now noticing, or becoming aware of. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of John Curran Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:38 AM To: Owen DeLong > Cc: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections On 7 Jan 2022, at 9:15 AM, Owen DeLong > wrote: ... Currently, the membership is able to have faith that the board will not unilaterally move away from majority election of directors because Virginia law forbids it without a change to the articles of incorporation that they would have to approve. The blanket language proposed in the current change, however, would allow the board to adopt any process it so chooses at any time without being subject to review of the membership. I think many, myself included, would like to see some level of check and balance requiring membership and/or community involvement and consideration in changing the election process(es) rather than writing a blank check for the board to do whatever it likes in this regard. Owen - For clarity, I?d like to address the question you raise about Board latitude in ARIN election processes, as that is a topic that is not actually addressed by the present consultation. Yes, the membership can rest assured under the present Articles and Bylaws that plurality voting will be used, but the remainder of the ARIN Election Processes are entirely under the control of the ARIN Board of Trustees with nominal constraints given in ARIN Bylaws; i.e. the present Articles and Bylaws provide the Board of Trustees rather generous latitude in establishment of the Election processes and already the Bylaws substantially allow "the board to adopt any process it so chooses at any time without being subject to review of the membership" The proposed Article and Bylaws change in the consultation does not change this latitude in a material manner, other than opening up the possible use of a STV voting system rather than the Virginia default of plurality. I understand that you?re suggesting that there should be much less Board latitude in establishing of ARIN?s Election Processes, but to some extent that is an orthogonal question to whether the ARIN Board be allowed to adopt election processes that specify STV voting model. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From athompson at merlin.mb.ca Fri Jan 7 13:18:44 2022 From: athompson at merlin.mb.ca (Adam Thompson) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 18:18:44 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: There?s a disconnect here, then, that apparently ARIN staff and/or the board didn?t foresee. STV? Yes, please. The specific amendments proposed? No. I?d rather be stuck with FPTP. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: John Curran Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 12:06 PM To: Adam Thompson Cc: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Adam - Yes, one could consider it a bug or a feature, depending on perspective. It is, however, not the question being asked of the consultation, which rather seeks to ask ?Should the ARIN Board of Trustees be able to specify use of the non-plurality model of STV for ARIN elections, including necessary changes to the Articles and Bylaws to allow that?? (I have no objection to more specific constraints on ARIN election processes in the Bylaws, but would suggest that such be done only to enshrine a successful approach that?s been proven after several years of operating experience...) Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 7 Jan 2022, at 9:55 AM, Adam Thompson > wrote: I get your point? but that?s a bug, not a feature. What you?ve described below is precisely the problem we?re now noticing, or becoming aware of. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of John Curran Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:38 AM To: Owen DeLong > Cc: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections On 7 Jan 2022, at 9:15 AM, Owen DeLong > wrote: ... Currently, the membership is able to have faith that the board will not unilaterally move away from majority election of directors because Virginia law forbids it without a change to the articles of incorporation that they would have to approve. The blanket language proposed in the current change, however, would allow the board to adopt any process it so chooses at any time without being subject to review of the membership. I think many, myself included, would like to see some level of check and balance requiring membership and/or community involvement and consideration in changing the election process(es) rather than writing a blank check for the board to do whatever it likes in this regard. Owen - For clarity, I?d like to address the question you raise about Board latitude in ARIN election processes, as that is a topic that is not actually addressed by the present consultation. Yes, the membership can rest assured under the present Articles and Bylaws that plurality voting will be used, but the remainder of the ARIN Election Processes are entirely under the control of the ARIN Board of Trustees with nominal constraints given in ARIN Bylaws; i.e. the present Articles and Bylaws provide the Board of Trustees rather generous latitude in establishment of the Election processes and already the Bylaws substantially allow "the board to adopt any process it so chooses at any time without being subject to review of the membership" The proposed Article and Bylaws change in the consultation does not change this latitude in a material manner, other than opening up the possible use of a STV voting system rather than the Virginia default of plurality. I understand that you?re suggesting that there should be much less Board latitude in establishing of ARIN?s Election Processes, but to some extent that is an orthogonal question to whether the ARIN Board be allowed to adopt election processes that specify STV voting model. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 2687 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From jcurran at arin.net Fri Jan 7 13:28:39 2022 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 18:28:39 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: <9ECF5D7E-B998-482E-A1F2-14D3CD684AFB@arin.net> On 7 Jan 2022, at 10:18 AM, Adam Thompson > wrote: There?s a disconnect here, then, that apparently ARIN staff and/or the board didn?t foresee. STV? Yes, please. The specific amendments proposed? No. I?d rather be stuck with FPTP. Adam - Thanks for that response - if I understand you correctly, you?re generally in favor of an STV voting model, but would only support the changes that allow its use by ARIN if the changes include specification in the Bylaws that use of an STV voting model is required? (It is quite possible that I did not correctly parse your intent, so please correct if otherwise...) Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From peter at colovore.com Fri Jan 7 13:31:14 2022 From: peter at colovore.com (Peter Harrison) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 10:31:14 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: Adam, As stated before, it is the Board's fiduciary responsibility to ensure that a change of this magnitude is equitable and not vulnerable to capricious change. We will act appropriately based on this feedback. Peter On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:03 AM Adam Thompson wrote: > Peter, I don?t have a problem with STV. I do have a problem with the > board having the latitude ? unfettered ? to keep changing voting systems > without further bylaw amendments. The type of voting structure, > particularly when deviating from the norm that?s baked into Virginia law, > should then be baked into the bylaws so that it can?t change in the middle > of the night, perhaps even during an election. > > > > Do I trust the current board to not pull stuff like that? Yeah, probably, > I think... (In fact, can I even name the current board members? No. But > that?s a different problem.) Am I willing to blindly trust every future > board that might exist? Absolutely not. I?ve seen how boards can be > co-opted, infiltrated, and/or ?turned to the dark side? (so to speak) > elsewhere. > > > > As far as the consultation?s goal to determine whether STV is OK or not? > Yes, it is good. This is an excellent move overall. > > > > -Adam > > > > *Adam Thompson* > Consultant, Infrastructure Services > [image: MERLIN] > 100 - 135 Innovation Drive > Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 > (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) > athompson at merlin.mb.ca > www.merlin.mb.ca > > > > *From:* ARIN-consult *On Behalf Of *Peter > Harrison > *Sent:* Friday, January 7, 2022 11:53 AM > *To:* arin-consult at arin.net > *Subject:* Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single > Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > > > Dear Community, > > > > With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones may be > invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one method. > > > > This link explains some of the options: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods > > > > We will need to balance the range of options with those provided by > current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. Investigations are > being made by staff and they will make recommendations to the board based > on their research into our needs, best practices, practicability, relative > merit, legal implications and systems availability. > > > > The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this is a > good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we are working > in the best interest of the members and the region they serve when > evaluating the choices presented. > > > > As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate multiple > forms of voting that may be required in future. The concern that this could > lead to opportunistic changes to systems each election cycle is sound. We > will investigate ways to ensure this does not happen with possible bylaw > wording to meet these and other goals. > > > > The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the > executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a workable > solution and concern for the membership has been evident every step of the > way. These consultations are the result of over two years of research and > were not taken lightly. We will continue to work to maintain this excellent > collaboration. > > > > Thank you for your feedback. > > > > Peter > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 2687 bytes Desc: not available URL: From athompson at merlin.mb.ca Fri Jan 7 13:33:12 2022 From: athompson at merlin.mb.ca (Adam Thompson) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 18:33:12 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: <9ECF5D7E-B998-482E-A1F2-14D3CD684AFB@arin.net> References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <9ECF5D7E-B998-482E-A1F2-14D3CD684AFB@arin.net> Message-ID: Yes, exactly. If we?re using a non-default voting model, there should be at least a passing reference to it in the Bylaws. I don?t know if 4(a) is the best spot for it, but something as simple as the sentence ?The Single Transferable Vote model shall be used for voting.? Implicit in that is ??until the Bylaws get changed again.? which is my whole point. There?s a million different ways to phrase it. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: John Curran Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 12:29 PM To: Adam Thompson Cc: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections On 7 Jan 2022, at 10:18 AM, Adam Thompson > wrote: There?s a disconnect here, then, that apparently ARIN staff and/or the board didn?t foresee. STV? Yes, please. The specific amendments proposed? No. I?d rather be stuck with FPTP. Adam - Thanks for that response - if I understand you correctly, you?re generally in favor of an STV voting model, but would only support the changes that allow its use by ARIN if the changes include specification in the Bylaws that use of an STV voting model is required? (It is quite possible that I did not correctly parse your intent, so please correct if otherwise...) Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 2687 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From bill at herrin.us Fri Jan 7 13:33:38 2022 From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 10:33:38 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 9:51 AM Peter Harrison wrote: > It is possible to create many scenarios that test the limits of STV and FPTP systems. I encourage you to consider their likelihood in our situation and discount them accordingly. Please remember the overall goal of creating greater equity using a globally deployed system designed by psephology thought leaders. Hi Peter, As an engineer, I earn a living making systems resistant to Murphy's Law. When I see a voting system like STV which allows for the election of the candidate most opposed by a clear majority of voters, alarm bells ring. It's an obviously incorrect outcome that shouldn't be possible. That STV -also- allows for the defeat of the 1st choice candidate most desired by a plurality of voters is an additional concern. Without a majority I can see an argument that support for the candidate was broad but shallow. Still, when considered in context with the obviously incorrect result above, I worry the math hides more error. So, I'm tentatively against STV voting. But then I'm an engineer, not a psephology thought leader. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ From owen at delong.com Fri Jan 7 13:44:56 2022 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 10:44:56 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: > On Jan 7, 2022, at 09:37 , John Curran wrote: > > On 7 Jan 2022, at 9:15 AM, Owen DeLong > wrote: >> ... >> Currently, the membership is able to have faith that the board will not unilaterally move away from majority election of directors because >> Virginia law forbids it without a change to the articles of incorporation that they would have to approve. >> >> The blanket language proposed in the current change, however, would allow the board to adopt any process it so chooses at any >> time without being subject to review of the membership. >> >> I think many, myself included, would like to see some level of check and balance requiring membership and/or community involvement >> and consideration in changing the election process(es) rather than writing a blank check for the board to do whatever it likes in this >> regard. > > Owen - > > For clarity, I?d like to address the question you raise about Board latitude in ARIN election processes, as that is a topic that is not actually addressed by the present consultation. > > Yes, the membership can rest assured under the present Articles and Bylaws that plurality voting will be used, but the remainder of the ARIN Election Processes are entirely under the control of the ARIN Board of Trustees with nominal constraints given in ARIN Bylaws; i.e. the present Articles and Bylaws provide the Board of Trustees rather generous latitude in establishment of the Election processes and already the Bylaws substantially allow "the board to adopt any process it so chooses at any time without being subject to review of the membership" Well, within the constraints of requiring a plurality of votes cast, quorum, etc. > The proposed Article and Bylaws change in the consultation does not change this latitude in a material manner, other than opening up the possible use of a STV voting system rather than the Virginia default of plurality. I understand that you?re suggesting that there should be much less Board latitude in establishing of ARIN?s Election Processes, but to some extent that is an orthogonal question to whether the ARIN Board be allowed to adopt election processes that specify STV voting model. Except that it eliminates the existing constraints. It doesn?t just open up the possible use of STV. It also (technically) opens up the possible use of coin-toss, game of poker, slot machine contest, appointment of new board members by existing board, or virtually any other mechanism the board may choose. So I?m suggesting that yes, it?s a good idea to allow some form of RCV (whether it be STV or another, personally, I favor STV). However, I?m also suggesting that since the bylaw/articles of incorporation change necessary to allow that is either broad (allowing for virtually any system of board appointment) or overly specific (amend the bylaws to specifically require STV) and the board has (IMHO rightly) chose broad, that to preserve proper checks and balances (i.e. to make sure the board isn?t able to choose coin-toss or board-appointment), there need to be a balancing set of controls put in place along side this amendment to the bylaws. Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chris at semihuman.com Fri Jan 7 14:05:37 2022 From: chris at semihuman.com (Chris Woodfield) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 11:05:37 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: <9ECF5D7E-B998-482E-A1F2-14D3CD684AFB@arin.net> References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <9ECF5D7E-B998-482E-A1F2-14D3CD684AFB@arin.net> Message-ID: <2AA6874D-365E-4CA7-8AFE-2DA81B1E65FB@semihuman.com> At the risk of me-too?ing - I don?t think I can state the concern more eloquently than it already has - you?ve captured my position as well. -C > On Jan 7, 2022, at 10:28 AM, John Curran wrote: > > On 7 Jan 2022, at 10:18 AM, Adam Thompson > wrote: >> >> There?s a disconnect here, then, that apparently ARIN staff and/or the board didn?t foresee. >> >> STV? Yes, please. >> The specific amendments proposed? No. I?d rather be stuck with FPTP. > > > Adam - > > Thanks for that response - if I understand you correctly, you?re generally in favor of an STV voting model, but would only support the changes that allow its use by ARIN if the changes include specification in the Bylaws that use of an STV voting model is required? (It is quite possible that I did not correctly parse your intent, so please correct if otherwise...) > > Thanks! > /John > > John Curran > President and CEO > American Registry for Internet Numbers > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Consult > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing > List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services > Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bill at herrin.us Fri Jan 7 14:07:54 2022 From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 11:07:54 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: I want to propose an alternative: Instead of making any bylaws change at this time, collect the votes for the next few ARIN elections in ranked-choice format but continue to use them as FPTP. That is, ask folks to rank their choices but then simply use the first ones in the list with the current FPTP math. Following each election, do a data dump of the votes cast and an analysis to see how the election -would have- turned out had STV been used. Then, bring the question back to consultation having acquired hard data demonstrating how the proposed system would have performed in our environment. I assume merely collecting ranked choices does not violate Virginia law? Regards, Bill Herrin On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:33 AM William Herrin wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 9:51 AM Peter Harrison wrote: > > It is possible to create many scenarios that test the limits of STV and FPTP systems. I encourage you to consider their likelihood in our situation and discount them accordingly. Please remember the overall goal of creating greater equity using a globally deployed system designed by psephology thought leaders. > > Hi Peter, > > As an engineer, I earn a living making systems resistant to Murphy's > Law. When I see a voting system like STV which allows for the election > of the candidate most opposed by a clear majority of voters, alarm > bells ring. It's an obviously incorrect outcome that shouldn't be > possible. > > That STV -also- allows for the defeat of the 1st choice candidate most > desired by a plurality of voters is an additional concern. Without a > majority I can see an argument that support for the candidate was > broad but shallow. Still, when considered in context with the > obviously incorrect result above, I worry the math hides more error. > > So, I'm tentatively against STV voting. > > But then I'm an engineer, not a psephology thought leader. > > Regards, > Bill Herrin > > -- > William Herrin > bill at herrin.us > https://bill.herrin.us/ -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ From rlaager at wiktel.com Fri Jan 7 14:15:02 2022 From: rlaager at wiktel.com (Richard Laager) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 13:15:02 -0600 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: On 1/7/22 12:33 PM, William Herrin wrote: > When I see a voting system like STV which allows for the election > of the candidate most opposed by a clear majority of voters, alarm > bells ring. It's an obviously incorrect outcome that shouldn't be > possible. "most opposed" isn't necessarily what's going on. For example, imagine a ballot with candidates that are very similar and the electorate is okay with all of them. -- Richard From bill at herrin.us Fri Jan 7 14:24:52 2022 From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 11:24:52 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 11:15 AM Richard Laager wrote: > On 1/7/22 12:33 PM, William Herrin wrote: > > When I see a voting system like STV which allows for the election > > of the candidate most opposed by a clear majority of voters, alarm > > bells ring. It's an obviously incorrect outcome that shouldn't be > > possible. > > "most opposed" isn't necessarily what's going on. For example, imagine a > ballot with candidates that are very similar and the electorate is okay > with all of them. Hi Richard, Refer to my prior post in which an example of "most opposed" is readily inferred. https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/2022-January/001507.html Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ From gary.buhrmaster at gmail.com Fri Jan 7 14:30:28 2022 From: gary.buhrmaster at gmail.com (Gary Buhrmaster) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 19:30:28 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 6:33 PM William Herrin wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 9:51 AM Peter Harrison wrote: > > It is possible to create many scenarios that test the limits of STV and FPTP systems. I encourage you to consider their likelihood in our situation and discount them accordingly. Please remember the overall goal of creating greater equity using a globally deployed system designed by psephology thought leaders. > > Hi Peter, > > As an engineer, I earn a living making systems resistant to Murphy's > Law. When I see a voting system like STV which allows for the election > of the candidate most opposed by a clear majority of voters, alarm > bells ring. It's an obviously incorrect outcome that shouldn't be > possible. RVC, in at least some variants, does not require one to assign a rank to all candidates (only allows it), so that candidates that are not desirable and have few trailing votes may not be able to cross any threshold. As with much else, the devil is in the details of the process, and the voters' understanding of that process. I think it is highly likely that most ARIN voting members will be able to understand the implications of their votes (although the experience of NYC suggests that it can confuse some of the people at least some of the time). From bill at herrin.us Fri Jan 7 14:39:16 2022 From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 11:39:16 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 11:31 AM Gary Buhrmaster wrote: > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 6:33 PM William Herrin wrote: > > As an engineer, I earn a living making systems resistant to Murphy's > > Law. When I see a voting system like STV which allows for the election > > of the candidate most opposed by a clear majority of voters, alarm > > bells ring. It's an obviously incorrect outcome that shouldn't be > > possible. > > RVC, in at least some variants, does not require > one to assign a rank to all candidates (only allows > it), so that candidates that are not desirable and > have few trailing votes may not be able to cross any > threshold. Hi Gary, In the example I composed (https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/2022-January/001507.html) it made no difference to the final tally whether the 65.5% of voters opposed to candidate 4 ranked him last or left him unranked. Candidate 4 was elected regardless. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ From rlaager at wiktel.com Fri Jan 7 14:48:24 2022 From: rlaager at wiktel.com (Richard Laager) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 13:48:24 -0600 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: On 1/7/22 1:24 PM, William Herrin wrote: > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 11:15 AM Richard Laager wrote: >> On 1/7/22 12:33 PM, William Herrin wrote: >>> When I see a voting system like STV which allows for the election >>> of the candidate most opposed by a clear majority of voters, alarm >>> bells ring. It's an obviously incorrect outcome that shouldn't be >>> possible. >> >> "most opposed" isn't necessarily what's going on. For example, imagine a >> ballot with candidates that are very similar and the electorate is okay >> with all of them. > Refer to my prior post in which an example of "most opposed" is > readily inferred. > https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/2022-January/001507.html I'm aware of your example and that's exactly my point. Looking at the percentage numbers (I don't have time to dig up Condorcet voting software and run the example through it), candidates 2, 3, and 4 could easily be clones. (Clones is a voting system term of art.) If they're clones, the electorate split across those candidates nearly evenly (21%, 20%, 19%), because they are pretty much the same. In that case, a good voting system should elect some of them. This a feature, not a bug: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_of_clones_criterion Take your vote counts, replace 2/3/4 with "C" (for clone), keep only the highest C in each line, and combine together. You get: 30% 1, C, 5 60% C, 1, 5 10% 5, C, 1 The cloned candidate was clearly preferred. -- Richard From owen at delong.com Fri Jan 7 15:01:50 2022 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 12:01:50 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: <7F8AC8C0-8861-487B-97B4-E036AC71D5F3@delong.com> I don?t (entirely) disagree, but I don?t want to replace incorrect limits with no limits. Owen > On Jan 7, 2022, at 09:55 , Adam Thompson wrote: > > I get your point? but that?s a bug, not a feature. What you?ve described below is precisely the problem we?re now noticing, or becoming aware of. > -Adam > > Adam Thompson > Consultant, Infrastructure Services > > 100 - 135 Innovation Drive > Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 > (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) > athompson at merlin.mb.ca > www.merlin.mb.ca > > From: ARIN-consult On Behalf Of John Curran > Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:38 AM > To: Owen DeLong > Cc: arin-consult at arin.net > Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > On 7 Jan 2022, at 9:15 AM, Owen DeLong > wrote: > ... > Currently, the membership is able to have faith that the board will not unilaterally move away from majority election of directors because > Virginia law forbids it without a change to the articles of incorporation that they would have to approve. > > The blanket language proposed in the current change, however, would allow the board to adopt any process it so chooses at any > time without being subject to review of the membership. > > I think many, myself included, would like to see some level of check and balance requiring membership and/or community involvement > and consideration in changing the election process(es) rather than writing a blank check for the board to do whatever it likes in this > regard. > > Owen - > > For clarity, I?d like to address the question you raise about Board latitude in ARIN election processes, as that is a topic that is not actually addressed by the present consultation. > > Yes, the membership can rest assured under the present Articles and Bylaws that plurality voting will be used, but the remainder of the ARIN Election Processes are entirely under the control of the ARIN Board of Trustees with nominal constraints given in ARIN Bylaws; i.e. the present Articles and Bylaws provide the Board of Trustees rather generous latitude in establishment of the Election processes and already the Bylaws substantially allow "the board to adopt any process it so chooses at any time without being subject to review of the membership" > > The proposed Article and Bylaws change in the consultation does not change this latitude in a material manner, other than opening up the possible use of a STV voting system rather than the Virginia default of plurality. I understand that you?re suggesting that there should be much less Board latitude in establishing of ARIN?s Election Processes, but to some extent that is an orthogonal question to whether the ARIN Board be allowed to adopt election processes that specify STV voting model. > > Thanks, > /John > > John Curran > President and CEO > American Registry for Internet Numbers > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paul at egate.net Fri Jan 7 15:02:39 2022 From: paul at egate.net (Paul Andersen) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 20:02:39 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: Bill, An interesting idea; however, putting aside confusion (why did I rank if your not going to use it) I think from my perspective I tend to vote based on the voting system in front of me. Who I would vote for in any given ARIN election first if it was ranked vs FPTP would be different. When deciding candidates the voting system is part of my strategy. Maybe not for others. P. > On Jan 7, 2022, at 2:07 PM, William Herrin wrote: > > I want to propose an alternative: > Following each election, do a data dump of the votes cast and an > analysis to see how the election -would have- turned out had STV been > used. Then, bring the question back to consultation having acquired > hard data demonstrating how the proposed system would have performed > in our environment. From jcurran at arin.net Fri Jan 7 15:18:33 2022 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 20:18:33 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: <53CE340C-D6CA-4894-8097-2E488CCBE98D@arin.net> Bill - Operationally this is certainly possible ? one would implement STV, but then confirm the Trustees to be seated based on the initial round vote tallies. It would provide some insight into whether STV voting system would have resulted in a different outcome in past elections then plurality voting (limited by Paul Andersen?s observation about impacts of the voting system on decisions of those casting), but I?ll note that it would some rather colorful aspects to be considered before proceeding - 1. Any Trustee elected via plurality who would not have been elected under STV risks a potential stigma (?you weren?t who the community really wanted?) 2. Perhaps more importantly, it would be challenging to make use of the data produced in public discussion of the merits of each system without inherently weighing in on the relative merits of the candidates involved - i.e. public discussion of ?Would STV have resulted in a better outcome in year nnnn than the plurality winner?? would be rather uncivil process to put a recently elected Trustee through... Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 7 Jan 2022, at 11:07 AM, William Herrin > wrote: I want to propose an alternative: Instead of making any bylaws change at this time, collect the votes for the next few ARIN elections in ranked-choice format but continue to use them as FPTP. That is, ask folks to rank their choices but then simply use the first ones in the list with the current FPTP math. Following each election, do a data dump of the votes cast and an analysis to see how the election -would have- turned out had STV been used. Then, bring the question back to consultation having acquired hard data demonstrating how the proposed system would have performed in our environment. I assume merely collecting ranked choices does not violate Virginia law? Regards, Bill Herrin On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:33 AM William Herrin > wrote: On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 9:51 AM Peter Harrison > wrote: It is possible to create many scenarios that test the limits of STV and FPTP systems. I encourage you to consider their likelihood in our situation and discount them accordingly. Please remember the overall goal of creating greater equity using a globally deployed system designed by psephology thought leaders. Hi Peter, As an engineer, I earn a living making systems resistant to Murphy's Law. When I see a voting system like STV which allows for the election of the candidate most opposed by a clear majority of voters, alarm bells ring. It's an obviously incorrect outcome that shouldn't be possible. That STV -also- allows for the defeat of the 1st choice candidate most desired by a plurality of voters is an additional concern. Without a majority I can see an argument that support for the candidate was broad but shallow. Still, when considered in context with the obviously incorrect result above, I worry the math hides more error. So, I'm tentatively against STV voting. But then I'm an engineer, not a psephology thought leader. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bill at herrin.us Fri Jan 7 15:23:45 2022 From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 12:23:45 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: <53CE340C-D6CA-4894-8097-2E488CCBE98D@arin.net> References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <53CE340C-D6CA-4894-8097-2E488CCBE98D@arin.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 12:18 PM John Curran wrote: > 1. Any Trustee elected via plurality who would not have been elected under STV risks a potential stigma (?you weren?t who the community really wanted?) > 2. Perhaps more importantly, it would be challenging to make use of the data produced in public discussion of the merits of each system without inherently weighing in on the relative merits of the candidates involved - i.e. public discussion of ?Would STV have resulted in a better outcome in year nnnn than the plurality winner?? would be rather uncivil process to put a recently elected Trustee through... Hi John, Those are good points. I think they could largely be resolved by withholding the data and calculations (including withholding it from the board) until it's time to return to consultation. There's still some potential for acrimony but it wouldn't appear until the trustees are well established in their roles. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ From bill at herrin.us Fri Jan 7 15:52:23 2022 From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 12:52:23 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 11:07 AM William Herrin wrote: > Instead of making any bylaws change at this time, collect the votes > for the next few ARIN elections in ranked-choice format but continue > to use them as FPTP. That is, ask folks to rank their choices but then > simply use the first ones in the list with the current FPTP math. It has been privately pointed out to me that another way to trial STV would be to use it to elect the advisory council for a few years and then go back and look at how it worked before proposing it for the BoT. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ From bill at herrin.us Fri Jan 7 15:53:40 2022 From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 12:53:40 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 11:48 AM Richard Laager wrote: > On 1/7/22 1:24 PM, William Herrin wrote: > > Refer to my prior post in which an example of "most opposed" is > > readily inferred. > > https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/2022-January/001507.html > > I'm aware of your example and that's exactly my point. > > Looking at the percentage numbers (I don't have time to dig up Condorcet > voting software and run the example through it), candidates 2, 3, and 4 > could easily be clones. (Clones is a voting system term of art.) > > If they're clones, the electorate split across those candidates nearly > evenly (21%, 20%, 19%), because they are pretty much the same. In that > case, a good voting system should elect some of them. This a feature, > not a bug: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_of_clones_criterion > > > Take your vote counts, replace 2/3/4 with "C" (for clone), keep only the > highest C in each line, and combine together. You get: > > 30% 1, C, 5 > 60% C, 1, 5 > 10% 5, C, 1 > > The cloned candidate was clearly preferred Hi Richard, I don't buy that explanation but I'll run with it for a moment. In such a case an equitable system should have selected candidate 1 plus a random one of the clones slightly weighted towards candidate 2. Instead STV selected two clones, excluding the more diverse voice from candidate 1. STV shifted the election toward the presumptively think-alike clones, reducing diversity of viewpoints among the elected. Now let's back up and move the numbers a bit further apart so that the middle candidates aren't clones. Elect two of five candidates: 30% 1, 3, 2, 5, 4 24% 3, 1, 2, 5, 4 19% 4, 1, 2, 5, 3 8% 2, 3, 1, 5, 4 9% 2, 4, 1, 5, 3 6% 5, 4, 1, 2, 3 4% 5, 3, 1, 2, 4 Opposition to 4 (ranked 5th or unranked): 66% Round A: 30% 1 24% 3 19% 4 17% 2 10% 5, eliminate 5 Round B: 30% 1 28% 3 25% 4 17% 2, eliminate 2 Round C: 30% 1 36% 3 34% 4, quotas met by 3 and 4. 3 and 4 elected. FPTP: 73% 1, 66% 3, 34% 4, 17% 2, 10% 5, 1 and 3 elected. Same problem. Candidate 1 who wins FPTP with a 73% majority is defeated by STV while candidate 4 who is opposed by a 66% majority gains election. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ From andrew.dul at quark.net Mon Jan 10 14:39:39 2022 From: andrew.dul at quark.net (Andrew Dul) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 11:39:39 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> Message-ID: <2e0f990c-aaef-a4d5-8b5d-560ea0ab7d10@quark.net> Perhaps a simple question, but "how" will the current board insure that future board(s) do not capriciously change the election mechanisms in the future? Making the changes to the "election process" subject to a majority vote of the membership and having that right inserted into the bylaws might be one method... Thanks, Andrew On 1/7/2022 10:31 AM, Peter Harrison wrote: > Adam, > > As stated before, it is the Board's fiduciary responsibility to ensure > that a change of this magnitude is equitable and not vulnerable to > capricious change. We will act appropriately based on this feedback. > > Peter > > > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:03 AM Adam Thompson > wrote: > > Peter, I don?t have a problem with STV.? I do have a problem with > the board having the latitude ? unfettered ? to keep changing > voting systems without further bylaw amendments.? The type of > voting structure, particularly when deviating from the norm that?s > baked into Virginia law, should then be baked into the bylaws so > that it can?t change in the middle of the night, perhaps even > during an election. > > Do I trust the current board to not pull stuff like that?? Yeah, > probably, I think...? (In fact, can I even name the current board > members?? No.? But that?s a different problem.)? Am I willing to > blindly trust every future board that might exist?? Absolutely > not. I?ve seen how boards can be co-opted, infiltrated, and/or > ?turned to the dark side? (so to speak) elsewhere. > > As far as the consultation?s goal to determine whether STV is OK > or not?? Yes, it is good.? This is an excellent move overall. > > -Adam > > *Adam Thompson* > Consultant, Infrastructure Services > MERLIN > 100 - 135 Innovation Drive > Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 > (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) > athompson at merlin.mb.ca > www.merlin.mb.ca > > *From:*ARIN-consult *On Behalf Of > *Peter Harrison > *Sent:* Friday, January 7, 2022 11:53 AM > *To:* arin-consult at arin.net > *Subject:* Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single > Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > Dear Community, > > With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones > may be invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one > method. > > This link explains some of the options: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods > > We will need to balance the range of options with those provided > by current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. > Investigations are being made by staff and they will make > recommendations to the board based on their research into our > needs, best practices, practicability, relative merit, legal > implications and systems availability. > > The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this > is a good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we > are working in the best interest of the members and the region > they serve when evaluating the choices presented. > > As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate > multiple forms of voting that may be required in future. The > concern that this could lead to opportunistic changes to systems > each election cycle is sound. We will investigate ways to ensure > this does not happen with possible bylaw wording to meet these and > other goals. > > The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the > executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a > workable solution and concern for the membership has been evident > every step of the way. These consultations are the result of over > two years of research and were not taken lightly. We will continue > to work to maintain this excellent collaboration. > > Thank you for your feedback. > > Peter > > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Consult > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing > List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services > Help Desk atinfo at arin.net if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 2687 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Marla.Azinger at FTR.com Mon Jan 10 14:53:29 2022 From: Marla.Azinger at FTR.com (Azinger, Marla) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 19:53:29 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: <2e0f990c-aaef-a4d5-8b5d-560ea0ab7d10@quark.net> References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <2e0f990c-aaef-a4d5-8b5d-560ea0ab7d10@quark.net> Message-ID: All of this is gaming no matter how you slice it. Silly me. I looked at the title and thought efforts were under way to stop one person from casting votes for companies they don?t actually work for but I didn?t read that in the write up. I would have thought we?d start there? if anything needs modification? Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image001.png at 01D80618.AC478660][cid:image002.png at 01D80618.AC478660] [cid:image003.png at 01D80618.AC478660] [cid:image004.png at 01D80618.AC478660] www.frontier.com From: ARIN-consult On Behalf Of Andrew Dul Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:40 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections ________________________________ WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links. ________________________________ Perhaps a simple question, but "how" will the current board insure that future board(s) do not capriciously change the election mechanisms in the future? Making the changes to the "election process" subject to a majority vote of the membership and having that right inserted into the bylaws might be one method... Thanks, Andrew On 1/7/2022 10:31 AM, Peter Harrison wrote: Adam, As stated before, it is the Board's fiduciary responsibility to ensure that a change of this magnitude is equitable and not vulnerable to capricious change. We will act appropriately based on this feedback. Peter On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:03 AM Adam Thompson > wrote: Peter, I don?t have a problem with STV. I do have a problem with the board having the latitude ? unfettered ? to keep changing voting systems without further bylaw amendments. The type of voting structure, particularly when deviating from the norm that?s baked into Virginia law, should then be baked into the bylaws so that it can?t change in the middle of the night, perhaps even during an election. Do I trust the current board to not pull stuff like that? Yeah, probably, I think... (In fact, can I even name the current board members? No. But that?s a different problem.) Am I willing to blindly trust every future board that might exist? Absolutely not. I?ve seen how boards can be co-opted, infiltrated, and/or ?turned to the dark side? (so to speak) elsewhere. As far as the consultation?s goal to determine whether STV is OK or not? Yes, it is good. This is an excellent move overall. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Peter Harrison Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:53 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Dear Community, With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones may be invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one method. This link explains some of the options: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods We will need to balance the range of options with those provided by current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. Investigations are being made by staff and they will make recommendations to the board based on their research into our needs, best practices, practicability, relative merit, legal implications and systems availability. The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this is a good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we are working in the best interest of the members and the region they serve when evaluating the choices presented. As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate multiple forms of voting that may be required in future. The concern that this could lead to opportunistic changes to systems each election cycle is sound. We will investigate ways to ensure this does not happen with possible bylaw wording to meet these and other goals. The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a workable solution and concern for the membership has been evident every step of the way. These consultations are the result of over two years of research and were not taken lightly. We will continue to work to maintain this excellent collaboration. Thank you for your feedback. Peter _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. ________________________________ This communication is confidential. Frontier only sends and receives email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.frontier.com/email_disclaimer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 5179 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 1538 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 1456 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.png Type: image/png Size: 1642 bytes Desc: image004.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.png Type: image/png Size: 2687 bytes Desc: image005.png URL: From athompson at merlin.mb.ca Mon Jan 10 15:01:53 2022 From: athompson at merlin.mb.ca (Adam Thompson) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 20:01:53 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <2e0f990c-aaef-a4d5-8b5d-560ea0ab7d10@quark.net> Message-ID: Not sure that?s low-hanging fruit, tbh. Besides MERLIN, I still have voting rights for ? 3? local ISPs, who are all aware of that and OK with that. In any other arena, that?s just holding a proxy vote, which is not a big deal. What sort of problems have you seen in this area (that I obviously haven?t)? -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult On Behalf Of Azinger, Marla Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:53 PM To: andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections All of this is gaming no matter how you slice it. Silly me. I looked at the title and thought efforts were under way to stop one person from casting votes for companies they don?t actually work for but I didn?t read that in the write up. I would have thought we?d start there? if anything needs modification? Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image006.png at 01D8062A.40B5D0C0][cid:image007.png at 01D8062A.40B5D0C0][cid:image008.png at 01D8062A.40B5D0C0] [cid:image009.png at 01D8062A.40B5D0C0] www.frontier.com From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Andrew Dul Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:40 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections ________________________________ WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links. ________________________________ Perhaps a simple question, but "how" will the current board insure that future board(s) do not capriciously change the election mechanisms in the future? Making the changes to the "election process" subject to a majority vote of the membership and having that right inserted into the bylaws might be one method... Thanks, Andrew On 1/7/2022 10:31 AM, Peter Harrison wrote: Adam, As stated before, it is the Board's fiduciary responsibility to ensure that a change of this magnitude is equitable and not vulnerable to capricious change. We will act appropriately based on this feedback. Peter On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:03 AM Adam Thompson > wrote: Peter, I don?t have a problem with STV. I do have a problem with the board having the latitude ? unfettered ? to keep changing voting systems without further bylaw amendments. The type of voting structure, particularly when deviating from the norm that?s baked into Virginia law, should then be baked into the bylaws so that it can?t change in the middle of the night, perhaps even during an election. Do I trust the current board to not pull stuff like that? Yeah, probably, I think... (In fact, can I even name the current board members? No. But that?s a different problem.) Am I willing to blindly trust every future board that might exist? Absolutely not. I?ve seen how boards can be co-opted, infiltrated, and/or ?turned to the dark side? (so to speak) elsewhere. As far as the consultation?s goal to determine whether STV is OK or not? Yes, it is good. This is an excellent move overall. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Peter Harrison Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:53 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Dear Community, With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones may be invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one method. This link explains some of the options: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods We will need to balance the range of options with those provided by current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. Investigations are being made by staff and they will make recommendations to the board based on their research into our needs, best practices, practicability, relative merit, legal implications and systems availability. The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this is a good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we are working in the best interest of the members and the region they serve when evaluating the choices presented. As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate multiple forms of voting that may be required in future. The concern that this could lead to opportunistic changes to systems each election cycle is sound. We will investigate ways to ensure this does not happen with possible bylaw wording to meet these and other goals. The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a workable solution and concern for the membership has been evident every step of the way. These consultations are the result of over two years of research and were not taken lightly. We will continue to work to maintain this excellent collaboration. Thank you for your feedback. Peter _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. ________________________________ This communication is confidential. Frontier only sends and receives email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.frontier.com/email_disclaimer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.png Type: image/png Size: 2687 bytes Desc: image005.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.png Type: image/png Size: 5179 bytes Desc: image006.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image007.png Type: image/png Size: 1538 bytes Desc: image007.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image008.png Type: image/png Size: 1456 bytes Desc: image008.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image009.png Type: image/png Size: 1642 bytes Desc: image009.png URL: From Marla.Azinger at FTR.com Mon Jan 10 16:01:18 2022 From: Marla.Azinger at FTR.com (Azinger, Marla) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 21:01:18 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <2e0f990c-aaef-a4d5-8b5d-560ea0ab7d10@quark.net> Message-ID: If ARIN is looking for people that actually want to be involved to cast the voting and really care, the votes would best be cast by anything other than a proxy. I find proxy voters don?t always care what the desire of the company is and there is no validation being done they casted votes how the owner of the vote would actually want. I?m not a fan of proxy this day in age. Proxy to me is a throw back to before online voting occurred. There?s no reason a company cant vote on their own. Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image001.png at 01D80622.06339C50][cid:image002.png at 01D80622.06339C50] [cid:image003.png at 01D80622.06339C50] [cid:image004.png at 01D80622.06339C50] www.frontier.com From: Adam Thompson Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 12:02 PM To: Azinger, Marla ; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Not sure that?s low-hanging fruit, tbh. Besides MERLIN, I still have voting rights for ? 3? local ISPs, who are all aware of that and OK with that. In any other arena, that?s just holding a proxy vote, which is not a big deal. What sort of problems have you seen in this area (that I obviously haven?t)? -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Azinger, Marla Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:53 PM To: andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections All of this is gaming no matter how you slice it. Silly me. I looked at the title and thought efforts were under way to stop one person from casting votes for companies they don?t actually work for but I didn?t read that in the write up. I would have thought we?d start there? if anything needs modification? Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image006.png at 01D80622.06339C50][cid:image007.png at 01D80622.06339C50][cid:image008.png at 01D80622.06339C50] [cid:image009.png at 01D80622.06339C50] www.frontier.com From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Andrew Dul Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:40 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections ________________________________ WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links. ________________________________ Perhaps a simple question, but "how" will the current board insure that future board(s) do not capriciously change the election mechanisms in the future? Making the changes to the "election process" subject to a majority vote of the membership and having that right inserted into the bylaws might be one method... Thanks, Andrew On 1/7/2022 10:31 AM, Peter Harrison wrote: Adam, As stated before, it is the Board's fiduciary responsibility to ensure that a change of this magnitude is equitable and not vulnerable to capricious change. We will act appropriately based on this feedback. Peter On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:03 AM Adam Thompson > wrote: Peter, I don?t have a problem with STV. I do have a problem with the board having the latitude ? unfettered ? to keep changing voting systems without further bylaw amendments. The type of voting structure, particularly when deviating from the norm that?s baked into Virginia law, should then be baked into the bylaws so that it can?t change in the middle of the night, perhaps even during an election. Do I trust the current board to not pull stuff like that? Yeah, probably, I think... (In fact, can I even name the current board members? No. But that?s a different problem.) Am I willing to blindly trust every future board that might exist? Absolutely not. I?ve seen how boards can be co-opted, infiltrated, and/or ?turned to the dark side? (so to speak) elsewhere. As far as the consultation?s goal to determine whether STV is OK or not? Yes, it is good. This is an excellent move overall. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Peter Harrison Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:53 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Dear Community, With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones may be invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one method. This link explains some of the options: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods We will need to balance the range of options with those provided by current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. Investigations are being made by staff and they will make recommendations to the board based on their research into our needs, best practices, practicability, relative merit, legal implications and systems availability. The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this is a good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we are working in the best interest of the members and the region they serve when evaluating the choices presented. As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate multiple forms of voting that may be required in future. The concern that this could lead to opportunistic changes to systems each election cycle is sound. We will investigate ways to ensure this does not happen with possible bylaw wording to meet these and other goals. The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a workable solution and concern for the membership has been evident every step of the way. These consultations are the result of over two years of research and were not taken lightly. We will continue to work to maintain this excellent collaboration. Thank you for your feedback. Peter _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. ________________________________ This communication is confidential. Frontier only sends and receives email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.frontier.com/email_disclaimer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 5180 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 1537 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 1456 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.png Type: image/png Size: 1641 bytes Desc: image004.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.png Type: image/png Size: 2687 bytes Desc: image005.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.png Type: image/png Size: 5179 bytes Desc: image006.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image007.png Type: image/png Size: 1538 bytes Desc: image007.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image008.png Type: image/png Size: 1456 bytes Desc: image008.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image009.png Type: image/png Size: 1642 bytes Desc: image009.png URL: From athompson at merlin.mb.ca Mon Jan 10 16:53:43 2022 From: athompson at merlin.mb.ca (Adam Thompson) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 21:53:43 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <2e0f990c-aaef-a4d5-8b5d-560ea0ab7d10@quark.net> Message-ID: There are two big reasons: apathy and limited staff time. Most small ISPs simply don?t care about ARIN governance, 99.999% of the time, and don?t have time to learn enough to discover how/what/when/where they should care. ARIN is just a force of nature they have to content with when they need more resources? In general, I don?t agree with you, at least not entirely: if a contractor is voting in the best interests of a client, with the client?s full knowledge, and is doing so for more than one client simultaneously, that?s still 100% legit. Expecting company owners to maintain a PoC and vote is not realistic, at least based on all the company owners I know (with perhaps a lone exception). And there is validation, of sorts: if someone votes against the interests of their client, a) they?re cutting their own throat, albeit indirectly, and b) if it?s discovered, they likely get fired or equivalent. So If someone has voting rights for an org that they have no legal/contractual relationship with, then that?s an odd situation. Either it?s ?legacy?, i.e. left over from when it was legit, which is very hard to fix in general, or it?s a situation that probably should never have happened in the first place. I?d be happy to see ways to solve those problems? assuming there?s any evidence whatsoever that it?s actually a problem in the first place. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: Azinger, Marla Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 3:01 PM To: Adam Thompson ; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections If ARIN is looking for people that actually want to be involved to cast the voting and really care, the votes would best be cast by anything other than a proxy. I find proxy voters don?t always care what the desire of the company is and there is no validation being done they casted votes how the owner of the vote would actually want. I?m not a fan of proxy this day in age. Proxy to me is a throw back to before online voting occurred. There?s no reason a company cant vote on their own. Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image010.png at 01D80637.88D8FF00][cid:image011.png at 01D80637.88D8FF00][cid:image012.png at 01D80637.88D8FF00] [cid:image013.png at 01D80637.88D8FF00] www.frontier.com From: Adam Thompson > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 12:02 PM To: Azinger, Marla >; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Not sure that?s low-hanging fruit, tbh. Besides MERLIN, I still have voting rights for ? 3? local ISPs, who are all aware of that and OK with that. In any other arena, that?s just holding a proxy vote, which is not a big deal. What sort of problems have you seen in this area (that I obviously haven?t)? -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Azinger, Marla Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:53 PM To: andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections All of this is gaming no matter how you slice it. Silly me. I looked at the title and thought efforts were under way to stop one person from casting votes for companies they don?t actually work for but I didn?t read that in the write up. I would have thought we?d start there? if anything needs modification? Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image014.png at 01D80637.88D8FF00][cid:image015.png at 01D80637.88D8FF00][cid:image016.png at 01D80637.88D8FF00] [cid:image017.png at 01D80637.88D8FF00] www.frontier.com From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Andrew Dul Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:40 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections ________________________________ WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links. ________________________________ Perhaps a simple question, but "how" will the current board insure that future board(s) do not capriciously change the election mechanisms in the future? Making the changes to the "election process" subject to a majority vote of the membership and having that right inserted into the bylaws might be one method... Thanks, Andrew On 1/7/2022 10:31 AM, Peter Harrison wrote: Adam, As stated before, it is the Board's fiduciary responsibility to ensure that a change of this magnitude is equitable and not vulnerable to capricious change. We will act appropriately based on this feedback. Peter On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:03 AM Adam Thompson > wrote: Peter, I don?t have a problem with STV. I do have a problem with the board having the latitude ? unfettered ? to keep changing voting systems without further bylaw amendments. The type of voting structure, particularly when deviating from the norm that?s baked into Virginia law, should then be baked into the bylaws so that it can?t change in the middle of the night, perhaps even during an election. Do I trust the current board to not pull stuff like that? Yeah, probably, I think... (In fact, can I even name the current board members? No. But that?s a different problem.) Am I willing to blindly trust every future board that might exist? Absolutely not. I?ve seen how boards can be co-opted, infiltrated, and/or ?turned to the dark side? (so to speak) elsewhere. As far as the consultation?s goal to determine whether STV is OK or not? Yes, it is good. This is an excellent move overall. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Peter Harrison Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:53 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Dear Community, With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones may be invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one method. This link explains some of the options: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods We will need to balance the range of options with those provided by current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. Investigations are being made by staff and they will make recommendations to the board based on their research into our needs, best practices, practicability, relative merit, legal implications and systems availability. The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this is a good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we are working in the best interest of the members and the region they serve when evaluating the choices presented. As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate multiple forms of voting that may be required in future. The concern that this could lead to opportunistic changes to systems each election cycle is sound. We will investigate ways to ensure this does not happen with possible bylaw wording to meet these and other goals. The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a workable solution and concern for the membership has been evident every step of the way. These consultations are the result of over two years of research and were not taken lightly. We will continue to work to maintain this excellent collaboration. Thank you for your feedback. Peter _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. ________________________________ This communication is confidential. Frontier only sends and receives email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.frontier.com/email_disclaimer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.png Type: image/png Size: 2687 bytes Desc: image005.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image010.png Type: image/png Size: 5180 bytes Desc: image010.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image011.png Type: image/png Size: 1537 bytes Desc: image011.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image012.png Type: image/png Size: 1456 bytes Desc: image012.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image013.png Type: image/png Size: 1641 bytes Desc: image013.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image014.png Type: image/png Size: 5179 bytes Desc: image014.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image015.png Type: image/png Size: 1538 bytes Desc: image015.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image016.png Type: image/png Size: 1456 bytes Desc: image016.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image017.png Type: image/png Size: 1642 bytes Desc: image017.png URL: From Marla.Azinger at FTR.com Mon Jan 10 16:57:51 2022 From: Marla.Azinger at FTR.com (Azinger, Marla) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 21:57:51 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <2e0f990c-aaef-a4d5-8b5d-560ea0ab7d10@quark.net> Message-ID: To identify the abusers you would simply have to look at the list of voters and what ORG ID?s they have control over. If they don?t work for the company they shouldn?t be controlling its votes. I don?t agree that proxy should exist. And yes it is another form of voter abuse. Clearly, we will not agree on this. Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image001.png at 01D8062A.0A21A5C0][cid:image002.png at 01D8062A.0A21A5C0] [cid:image003.png at 01D8062A.0A21A5C0] [cid:image004.png at 01D8062A.0A21A5C0] www.frontier.com From: Adam Thompson Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:54 PM To: Azinger, Marla ; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections There are two big reasons: apathy and limited staff time. Most small ISPs simply don?t care about ARIN governance, 99.999% of the time, and don?t have time to learn enough to discover how/what/when/where they should care. ARIN is just a force of nature they have to content with when they need more resources? In general, I don?t agree with you, at least not entirely: if a contractor is voting in the best interests of a client, with the client?s full knowledge, and is doing so for more than one client simultaneously, that?s still 100% legit. Expecting company owners to maintain a PoC and vote is not realistic, at least based on all the company owners I know (with perhaps a lone exception). And there is validation, of sorts: if someone votes against the interests of their client, a) they?re cutting their own throat, albeit indirectly, and b) if it?s discovered, they likely get fired or equivalent. So If someone has voting rights for an org that they have no legal/contractual relationship with, then that?s an odd situation. Either it?s ?legacy?, i.e. left over from when it was legit, which is very hard to fix in general, or it?s a situation that probably should never have happened in the first place. I?d be happy to see ways to solve those problems? assuming there?s any evidence whatsoever that it?s actually a problem in the first place. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: Azinger, Marla > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 3:01 PM To: Adam Thompson >; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections If ARIN is looking for people that actually want to be involved to cast the voting and really care, the votes would best be cast by anything other than a proxy. I find proxy voters don?t always care what the desire of the company is and there is no validation being done they casted votes how the owner of the vote would actually want. I?m not a fan of proxy this day in age. Proxy to me is a throw back to before online voting occurred. There?s no reason a company cant vote on their own. Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image006.png at 01D8062A.0A21A5C0][cid:image007.png at 01D8062A.0A21A5C0][cid:image008.png at 01D8062A.0A21A5C0] [cid:image009.png at 01D8062A.0A21A5C0] www.frontier.com From: Adam Thompson > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 12:02 PM To: Azinger, Marla >; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Not sure that?s low-hanging fruit, tbh. Besides MERLIN, I still have voting rights for ? 3? local ISPs, who are all aware of that and OK with that. In any other arena, that?s just holding a proxy vote, which is not a big deal. What sort of problems have you seen in this area (that I obviously haven?t)? -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Azinger, Marla Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:53 PM To: andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections All of this is gaming no matter how you slice it. Silly me. I looked at the title and thought efforts were under way to stop one person from casting votes for companies they don?t actually work for but I didn?t read that in the write up. I would have thought we?d start there? if anything needs modification? Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image010.png at 01D8062A.0A21A5C0][cid:image011.png at 01D8062A.0A21A5C0][cid:image012.png at 01D8062A.0A21A5C0] [cid:image013.png at 01D8062A.0A21A5C0] www.frontier.com From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Andrew Dul Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:40 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections ________________________________ WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links. ________________________________ Perhaps a simple question, but "how" will the current board insure that future board(s) do not capriciously change the election mechanisms in the future? Making the changes to the "election process" subject to a majority vote of the membership and having that right inserted into the bylaws might be one method... Thanks, Andrew On 1/7/2022 10:31 AM, Peter Harrison wrote: Adam, As stated before, it is the Board's fiduciary responsibility to ensure that a change of this magnitude is equitable and not vulnerable to capricious change. We will act appropriately based on this feedback. Peter On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:03 AM Adam Thompson > wrote: Peter, I don?t have a problem with STV. I do have a problem with the board having the latitude ? unfettered ? to keep changing voting systems without further bylaw amendments. The type of voting structure, particularly when deviating from the norm that?s baked into Virginia law, should then be baked into the bylaws so that it can?t change in the middle of the night, perhaps even during an election. Do I trust the current board to not pull stuff like that? Yeah, probably, I think... (In fact, can I even name the current board members? No. But that?s a different problem.) Am I willing to blindly trust every future board that might exist? Absolutely not. I?ve seen how boards can be co-opted, infiltrated, and/or ?turned to the dark side? (so to speak) elsewhere. As far as the consultation?s goal to determine whether STV is OK or not? Yes, it is good. This is an excellent move overall. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Peter Harrison Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:53 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Dear Community, With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones may be invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one method. This link explains some of the options: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods We will need to balance the range of options with those provided by current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. Investigations are being made by staff and they will make recommendations to the board based on their research into our needs, best practices, practicability, relative merit, legal implications and systems availability. The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this is a good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we are working in the best interest of the members and the region they serve when evaluating the choices presented. As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate multiple forms of voting that may be required in future. The concern that this could lead to opportunistic changes to systems each election cycle is sound. We will investigate ways to ensure this does not happen with possible bylaw wording to meet these and other goals. The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a workable solution and concern for the membership has been evident every step of the way. These consultations are the result of over two years of research and were not taken lightly. We will continue to work to maintain this excellent collaboration. Thank you for your feedback. Peter _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. ________________________________ This communication is confidential. Frontier only sends and receives email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.frontier.com/email_disclaimer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 5179 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 1538 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 1456 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.png Type: image/png Size: 1642 bytes Desc: image004.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.png Type: image/png Size: 2687 bytes Desc: image005.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.png Type: image/png Size: 5180 bytes Desc: image006.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image007.png Type: image/png Size: 1537 bytes Desc: image007.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image008.png Type: image/png Size: 1456 bytes Desc: image008.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image009.png Type: image/png Size: 1641 bytes Desc: image009.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image010.png Type: image/png Size: 5179 bytes Desc: image010.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image011.png Type: image/png Size: 1538 bytes Desc: image011.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image012.png Type: image/png Size: 1456 bytes Desc: image012.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image013.png Type: image/png Size: 1642 bytes Desc: image013.png URL: From athompson at merlin.mb.ca Mon Jan 10 17:01:26 2022 From: athompson at merlin.mb.ca (Adam Thompson) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 22:01:26 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <2e0f990c-aaef-a4d5-8b5d-560ea0ab7d10@quark.net> Message-ID: Nope. I have been hired three times in the past to cast an ARIN vote for someone else because they didn?t want to take the time to figure it out. I would say that organization experience defines the difference in perspective here: contracting out core functions is 100% normal up here, especially for smaller orgs. So ?if they don?t work for the company? is not a valid test for ? by my best estimation ? at least tens of thousands of companies that will shortly be eligible to vote. If you?ve never worked in that sort of environment, it may seem strange. I can think of several local companies that are ARIN orgs, off the top of my head, that have ZERO employees ? only contractors. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: Azinger, Marla Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 3:58 PM To: Adam Thompson ; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections To identify the abusers you would simply have to look at the list of voters and what ORG ID?s they have control over. If they don?t work for the company they shouldn?t be controlling its votes. I don?t agree that proxy should exist. And yes it is another form of voter abuse. Clearly, we will not agree on this. Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image002.png at 01D8063A.E1F2B880][cid:image003.png at 01D8063A.E1F2B880][cid:image004.png at 01D8063A.E1F2B880] [cid:image005.png at 01D8063A.E1F2B880] www.frontier.com From: Adam Thompson > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:54 PM To: Azinger, Marla >; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections There are two big reasons: apathy and limited staff time. Most small ISPs simply don?t care about ARIN governance, 99.999% of the time, and don?t have time to learn enough to discover how/what/when/where they should care. ARIN is just a force of nature they have to content with when they need more resources? In general, I don?t agree with you, at least not entirely: if a contractor is voting in the best interests of a client, with the client?s full knowledge, and is doing so for more than one client simultaneously, that?s still 100% legit. Expecting company owners to maintain a PoC and vote is not realistic, at least based on all the company owners I know (with perhaps a lone exception). And there is validation, of sorts: if someone votes against the interests of their client, a) they?re cutting their own throat, albeit indirectly, and b) if it?s discovered, they likely get fired or equivalent. So If someone has voting rights for an org that they have no legal/contractual relationship with, then that?s an odd situation. Either it?s ?legacy?, i.e. left over from when it was legit, which is very hard to fix in general, or it?s a situation that probably should never have happened in the first place. I?d be happy to see ways to solve those problems? assuming there?s any evidence whatsoever that it?s actually a problem in the first place. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: Azinger, Marla > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 3:01 PM To: Adam Thompson >; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections If ARIN is looking for people that actually want to be involved to cast the voting and really care, the votes would best be cast by anything other than a proxy. I find proxy voters don?t always care what the desire of the company is and there is no validation being done they casted votes how the owner of the vote would actually want. I?m not a fan of proxy this day in age. Proxy to me is a throw back to before online voting occurred. There?s no reason a company cant vote on their own. Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image006.png at 01D8063A.E1F2B880][cid:image007.png at 01D8063A.E1F2B880][cid:image008.png at 01D8063A.E1F2B880] [cid:image009.png at 01D8063A.E1F2B880] www.frontier.com From: Adam Thompson > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 12:02 PM To: Azinger, Marla >; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Not sure that?s low-hanging fruit, tbh. Besides MERLIN, I still have voting rights for ? 3? local ISPs, who are all aware of that and OK with that. In any other arena, that?s just holding a proxy vote, which is not a big deal. What sort of problems have you seen in this area (that I obviously haven?t)? -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Azinger, Marla Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:53 PM To: andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections All of this is gaming no matter how you slice it. Silly me. I looked at the title and thought efforts were under way to stop one person from casting votes for companies they don?t actually work for but I didn?t read that in the write up. I would have thought we?d start there? if anything needs modification? Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image002.png at 01D8063A.E1F2B880][cid:image003.png at 01D8063A.E1F2B880][cid:image004.png at 01D8063A.E1F2B880] [cid:image005.png at 01D8063A.E1F2B880] www.frontier.com From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Andrew Dul Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:40 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections ________________________________ WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links. ________________________________ Perhaps a simple question, but "how" will the current board insure that future board(s) do not capriciously change the election mechanisms in the future? Making the changes to the "election process" subject to a majority vote of the membership and having that right inserted into the bylaws might be one method... Thanks, Andrew On 1/7/2022 10:31 AM, Peter Harrison wrote: Adam, As stated before, it is the Board's fiduciary responsibility to ensure that a change of this magnitude is equitable and not vulnerable to capricious change. We will act appropriately based on this feedback. Peter On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:03 AM Adam Thompson > wrote: Peter, I don?t have a problem with STV. I do have a problem with the board having the latitude ? unfettered ? to keep changing voting systems without further bylaw amendments. The type of voting structure, particularly when deviating from the norm that?s baked into Virginia law, should then be baked into the bylaws so that it can?t change in the middle of the night, perhaps even during an election. Do I trust the current board to not pull stuff like that? Yeah, probably, I think... (In fact, can I even name the current board members? No. But that?s a different problem.) Am I willing to blindly trust every future board that might exist? Absolutely not. I?ve seen how boards can be co-opted, infiltrated, and/or ?turned to the dark side? (so to speak) elsewhere. As far as the consultation?s goal to determine whether STV is OK or not? Yes, it is good. This is an excellent move overall. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Peter Harrison Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:53 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Dear Community, With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones may be invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one method. This link explains some of the options: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods We will need to balance the range of options with those provided by current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. Investigations are being made by staff and they will make recommendations to the board based on their research into our needs, best practices, practicability, relative merit, legal implications and systems availability. The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this is a good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we are working in the best interest of the members and the region they serve when evaluating the choices presented. As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate multiple forms of voting that may be required in future. The concern that this could lead to opportunistic changes to systems each election cycle is sound. We will investigate ways to ensure this does not happen with possible bylaw wording to meet these and other goals. The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a workable solution and concern for the membership has been evident every step of the way. These consultations are the result of over two years of research and were not taken lightly. We will continue to work to maintain this excellent collaboration. Thank you for your feedback. Peter _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. ________________________________ This communication is confidential. Frontier only sends and receives email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.frontier.com/email_disclaimer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 2687 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 5179 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 1538 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.png Type: image/png Size: 1456 bytes Desc: image004.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.png Type: image/png Size: 1642 bytes Desc: image005.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.png Type: image/png Size: 5180 bytes Desc: image006.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image007.png Type: image/png Size: 1537 bytes Desc: image007.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image008.png Type: image/png Size: 1456 bytes Desc: image008.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image009.png Type: image/png Size: 1641 bytes Desc: image009.png URL: From Marla.Azinger at FTR.com Mon Jan 10 17:14:58 2022 From: Marla.Azinger at FTR.com (Azinger, Marla) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 22:14:58 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <2e0f990c-aaef-a4d5-8b5d-560ea0ab7d10@quark.net> Message-ID: If you are in fact a contractor doing actual work and not just a troll that has befriended someone at an ISP promising faith to vote in their best interest, then you are working for that company. Contracted personnel are employees. That said. One person voting on behalf of several different companies is not diversity in any leap of the imagination. Again. No matter what is done here, there will always be gaming. Just looking at changing how this works is gaming. I?m kinda sorry I wasted my time reading this thread and responding at all. Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image010.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30][cid:image011.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30] [cid:image012.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30] [cid:image013.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30] www.frontier.com From: Adam Thompson Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 2:01 PM To: Azinger, Marla ; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Nope. I have been hired three times in the past to cast an ARIN vote for someone else because they didn?t want to take the time to figure it out. I would say that organization experience defines the difference in perspective here: contracting out core functions is 100% normal up here, especially for smaller orgs. So ?if they don?t work for the company? is not a valid test for ? by my best estimation ? at least tens of thousands of companies that will shortly be eligible to vote. If you?ve never worked in that sort of environment, it may seem strange. I can think of several local companies that are ARIN orgs, off the top of my head, that have ZERO employees ? only contractors. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: Azinger, Marla > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 3:58 PM To: Adam Thompson >; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections To identify the abusers you would simply have to look at the list of voters and what ORG ID?s they have control over. If they don?t work for the company they shouldn?t be controlling its votes. I don?t agree that proxy should exist. And yes it is another form of voter abuse. Clearly, we will not agree on this. Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image015.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30][cid:image016.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30][cid:image017.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30] [cid:image018.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30] www.frontier.com From: Adam Thompson > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:54 PM To: Azinger, Marla >; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections There are two big reasons: apathy and limited staff time. Most small ISPs simply don?t care about ARIN governance, 99.999% of the time, and don?t have time to learn enough to discover how/what/when/where they should care. ARIN is just a force of nature they have to content with when they need more resources? In general, I don?t agree with you, at least not entirely: if a contractor is voting in the best interests of a client, with the client?s full knowledge, and is doing so for more than one client simultaneously, that?s still 100% legit. Expecting company owners to maintain a PoC and vote is not realistic, at least based on all the company owners I know (with perhaps a lone exception). And there is validation, of sorts: if someone votes against the interests of their client, a) they?re cutting their own throat, albeit indirectly, and b) if it?s discovered, they likely get fired or equivalent. So If someone has voting rights for an org that they have no legal/contractual relationship with, then that?s an odd situation. Either it?s ?legacy?, i.e. left over from when it was legit, which is very hard to fix in general, or it?s a situation that probably should never have happened in the first place. I?d be happy to see ways to solve those problems? assuming there?s any evidence whatsoever that it?s actually a problem in the first place. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: Azinger, Marla > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 3:01 PM To: Adam Thompson >; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections If ARIN is looking for people that actually want to be involved to cast the voting and really care, the votes would best be cast by anything other than a proxy. I find proxy voters don?t always care what the desire of the company is and there is no validation being done they casted votes how the owner of the vote would actually want. I?m not a fan of proxy this day in age. Proxy to me is a throw back to before online voting occurred. There?s no reason a company cant vote on their own. Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image019.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30][cid:image020.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30][cid:image021.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30] [cid:image022.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30] www.frontier.com From: Adam Thompson > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 12:02 PM To: Azinger, Marla >; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Not sure that?s low-hanging fruit, tbh. Besides MERLIN, I still have voting rights for ? 3? local ISPs, who are all aware of that and OK with that. In any other arena, that?s just holding a proxy vote, which is not a big deal. What sort of problems have you seen in this area (that I obviously haven?t)? -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Azinger, Marla Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:53 PM To: andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections All of this is gaming no matter how you slice it. Silly me. I looked at the title and thought efforts were under way to stop one person from casting votes for companies they don?t actually work for but I didn?t read that in the write up. I would have thought we?d start there? if anything needs modification? Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com [cid:image015.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30][cid:image016.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30][cid:image017.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30] [cid:image018.png at 01D8062C.6D75BD30] www.frontier.com From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Andrew Dul Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:40 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections ________________________________ WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links. ________________________________ Perhaps a simple question, but "how" will the current board insure that future board(s) do not capriciously change the election mechanisms in the future? Making the changes to the "election process" subject to a majority vote of the membership and having that right inserted into the bylaws might be one method... Thanks, Andrew On 1/7/2022 10:31 AM, Peter Harrison wrote: Adam, As stated before, it is the Board's fiduciary responsibility to ensure that a change of this magnitude is equitable and not vulnerable to capricious change. We will act appropriately based on this feedback. Peter On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:03 AM Adam Thompson > wrote: Peter, I don?t have a problem with STV. I do have a problem with the board having the latitude ? unfettered ? to keep changing voting systems without further bylaw amendments. The type of voting structure, particularly when deviating from the norm that?s baked into Virginia law, should then be baked into the bylaws so that it can?t change in the middle of the night, perhaps even during an election. Do I trust the current board to not pull stuff like that? Yeah, probably, I think... (In fact, can I even name the current board members? No. But that?s a different problem.) Am I willing to blindly trust every future board that might exist? Absolutely not. I?ve seen how boards can be co-opted, infiltrated, and/or ?turned to the dark side? (so to speak) elsewhere. As far as the consultation?s goal to determine whether STV is OK or not? Yes, it is good. This is an excellent move overall. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services [MERLIN] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Peter Harrison Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:53 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Dear Community, With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones may be invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one method. This link explains some of the options: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods We will need to balance the range of options with those provided by current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. Investigations are being made by staff and they will make recommendations to the board based on their research into our needs, best practices, practicability, relative merit, legal implications and systems availability. The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this is a good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we are working in the best interest of the members and the region they serve when evaluating the choices presented. As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate multiple forms of voting that may be required in future. The concern that this could lead to opportunistic changes to systems each election cycle is sound. We will investigate ways to ensure this does not happen with possible bylaw wording to meet these and other goals. The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a workable solution and concern for the membership has been evident every step of the way. These consultations are the result of over two years of research and were not taken lightly. We will continue to work to maintain this excellent collaboration. Thank you for your feedback. Peter _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. ________________________________ This communication is confidential. Frontier only sends and receives email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.frontier.com/email_disclaimer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image010.png Type: image/png Size: 5180 bytes Desc: image010.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image011.png Type: image/png Size: 1538 bytes Desc: image011.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image012.png Type: image/png Size: 1456 bytes Desc: image012.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image013.png Type: image/png Size: 1642 bytes Desc: image013.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image014.png Type: image/png Size: 2687 bytes Desc: image014.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image015.png Type: image/png Size: 5179 bytes Desc: image015.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image016.png Type: image/png Size: 1538 bytes Desc: image016.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image017.png Type: image/png Size: 1456 bytes Desc: image017.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image018.png Type: image/png Size: 1642 bytes Desc: image018.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image019.png Type: image/png Size: 5180 bytes Desc: image019.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image020.png Type: image/png Size: 1537 bytes Desc: image020.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image021.png Type: image/png Size: 1456 bytes Desc: image021.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image022.png Type: image/png Size: 1641 bytes Desc: image022.png URL: From jcurran at arin.net Tue Jan 18 20:06:33 2022 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2022 01:06:33 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] ARIN general-members mailing list and governance consultations (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] New ARIN Mailing List for General Member Discussions) References: Message-ID: Important - organizations interested in ARIN governance are encouraged to join the general-members mailing list, as we will be utilizing this list in the near future for consultation on governance-related matters. (As a reminder, all organizations with an RSA for IPv4 and/or IPv6 registration services from ARIN can agree to the relevant participation standards and become ARIN General Members.) Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers FYI - Important announcement regarding formation of a new mailing list for those ARIN members interested in ARIN?s governance. Begin forwarded message: From: ARIN > Subject: [arin-announce] New ARIN Mailing List for General Member Discussions Date: 18 January 2022 at 11:01:08 AM HST To: "arin-announce at arin.net" > We are pleased to announce the opening of a new mailing list for General Member discussions at ARIN. This new list is the successor of the previous member-only arin-discuss mailing list. Subscription to this list will be limited to General Members and is intended for discussion of topics related to ARIN governance. Subscribers must use an email address that is associated with an ARIN General Member organization for verification purposes. This list is subject to the ARIN Mailing List AUP, which is available to view at: https://www.arin.net/participate/community/mailing_lists/aup/ You can subscribe to this mailing list at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/general-members We look forward to your participation. Regards, John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) _______________________________________________ ARIN-Announce You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Announce Mailing List (ARIN-announce at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-announce Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Fri Jan 21 19:46:54 2022 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2022 16:46:54 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <2e0f990c-aaef-a4d5-8b5d-560ea0ab7d10@quark.net> Message-ID: <58504D7D-D2BE-4A02-BCBF-E0B89B3AA6CF@delong.com> > On Jan 10, 2022, at 14:14 , Azinger, Marla wrote: > > If you are in fact a contractor doing actual work and not just a troll that has befriended someone at an ISP promising faith to vote in their best interest, then you are working for that company. Contracted personnel are employees. The IRS and many other government agencies draw stark distinctions between Contractors and Employees. For example: Employees get a W-2 in January. Contractors (may) get a 1099 (now of a couple of different possible types) in February. There are other distinctions. There are good reasons for these distinctions. I?m all for eliminating abuse, but ?is not employed by? is not a valid definition. I would accept ?Has no business affiliation with? or ?Is not an authorized agent of? or other similar language (Michael can probably provide a best recommendation here, as ARIN?s general counsel). Owen > > That said. One person voting on behalf of several different companies is not diversity in any leap of the imagination. > > Again. No matter what is done here, there will always be gaming. Just looking at changing how this works is gaming. > > I?m kinda sorry I wasted my time reading this thread and responding at all. > > Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management > O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com > www.frontier.com > > > From: Adam Thompson > > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 2:01 PM > To: Azinger, Marla >; andrew.dul at quark.net ; arin-consult at arin.net > Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > Nope. I have been hired three times in the past to cast an ARIN vote for someone else because they didn?t want to take the time to figure it out. > I would say that organization experience defines the difference in perspective here: contracting out core functions is 100% normal up here, especially for smaller orgs. So ?if they don?t work for the company? is not a valid test for ? by my best estimation ? at least tens of thousands of companies that will shortly be eligible to vote. If you?ve never worked in that sort of environment, it may seem strange. I can think of several local companies that are ARIN orgs, off the top of my head, that have ZERO employees ? only contractors. > -Adam > > Adam Thompson > Consultant, Infrastructure Services > > 100 - 135 Innovation Drive > Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 > (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) > athompson at merlin.mb.ca > www.merlin.mb.ca > > From: Azinger, Marla > > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 3:58 PM > To: Adam Thompson >; andrew.dul at quark.net ; arin-consult at arin.net > Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > To identify the abusers you would simply have to look at the list of voters and what ORG ID?s they have control over. If they don?t work for the company they shouldn?t be controlling its votes. > > I don?t agree that proxy should exist. And yes it is another form of voter abuse. Clearly, we will not agree on this. > > Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management > O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com > www.frontier.com > > > From: Adam Thompson > > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:54 PM > To: Azinger, Marla >; andrew.dul at quark.net ; arin-consult at arin.net > Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > There are two big reasons: apathy and limited staff time. Most small ISPs simply don?t care about ARIN governance, 99.999% of the time, and don?t have time to learn enough to discover how/what/when/where they should care. ARIN is just a force of nature they have to content with when they need more resources? > > In general, I don?t agree with you, at least not entirely: if a contractor is voting in the best interests of a client, with the client?s full knowledge, and is doing so for more than one client simultaneously, that?s still 100% legit. Expecting company owners to maintain a PoC and vote is not realistic, at least based on all the company owners I know (with perhaps a lone exception). And there is validation, of sorts: if someone votes against the interests of their client, a) they?re cutting their own throat, albeit indirectly, and b) if it?s discovered, they likely get fired or equivalent. > > So If someone has voting rights for an org that they have no legal/contractual relationship with, then that?s an odd situation. Either it?s ?legacy?, i.e. left over from when it was legit, which is very hard to fix in general, or it?s a situation that probably should never have happened in the first place. I?d be happy to see ways to solve those problems? assuming there?s any evidence whatsoever that it?s actually a problem in the first place. > > -Adam > > Adam Thompson > Consultant, Infrastructure Services > > 100 - 135 Innovation Drive > Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 > (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) > athompson at merlin.mb.ca > www.merlin.mb.ca > > From: Azinger, Marla > > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 3:01 PM > To: Adam Thompson >; andrew.dul at quark.net ; arin-consult at arin.net > Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > If ARIN is looking for people that actually want to be involved to cast the voting and really care, the votes would best be cast by anything other than a proxy. > > I find proxy voters don?t always care what the desire of the company is and there is no validation being done they casted votes how the owner of the vote would actually want. > > I?m not a fan of proxy this day in age. Proxy to me is a throw back to before online voting occurred. There?s no reason a company cant vote on their own. > > > Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management > O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com > www.frontier.com > > > From: Adam Thompson > > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 12:02 PM > To: Azinger, Marla >; andrew.dul at quark.net ; arin-consult at arin.net > Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > Not sure that?s low-hanging fruit, tbh. Besides MERLIN, I still have voting rights for ? 3? local ISPs, who are all aware of that and OK with that. In any other arena, that?s just holding a proxy vote, which is not a big deal. > What sort of problems have you seen in this area (that I obviously haven?t)? > -Adam > > Adam Thompson > Consultant, Infrastructure Services > > 100 - 135 Innovation Drive > Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 > (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) > athompson at merlin.mb.ca > www.merlin.mb.ca > > From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Azinger, Marla > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:53 PM > To: andrew.dul at quark.net ; arin-consult at arin.net > Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > All of this is gaming no matter how you slice it. > > Silly me. I looked at the title and thought efforts were under way to stop one person from casting votes for companies they don?t actually work for but I didn?t read that in the write up. I would have thought we?d start there? if anything needs modification? > > Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management > O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com > www.frontier.com > > > From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Andrew Dul > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:40 AM > To: arin-consult at arin.net > Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links. > > > Perhaps a simple question, but "how" will the current board insure that future board(s) do not capriciously change the election mechanisms in the future? > > Making the changes to the "election process" subject to a majority vote of the membership and having that right inserted into the bylaws might be one method... > > Thanks, > Andrew > > On 1/7/2022 10:31 AM, Peter Harrison wrote: > Adam, > > As stated before, it is the Board's fiduciary responsibility to ensure that a change of this magnitude is equitable and not vulnerable to capricious change. We will act appropriately based on this feedback. > > Peter > > > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:03 AM Adam Thompson > wrote: > Peter, I don?t have a problem with STV. I do have a problem with the board having the latitude ? unfettered ? to keep changing voting systems without further bylaw amendments. The type of voting structure, particularly when deviating from the norm that?s baked into Virginia law, should then be baked into the bylaws so that it can?t change in the middle of the night, perhaps even during an election. > > Do I trust the current board to not pull stuff like that? Yeah, probably, I think... (In fact, can I even name the current board members? No. But that?s a different problem.) Am I willing to blindly trust every future board that might exist? Absolutely not. I?ve seen how boards can be co-opted, infiltrated, and/or ?turned to the dark side? (so to speak) elsewhere. > > As far as the consultation?s goal to determine whether STV is OK or not? Yes, it is good. This is an excellent move overall. > > -Adam > > Adam Thompson > Consultant, Infrastructure Services > > 100 - 135 Innovation Drive > Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 > (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) > athompson at merlin.mb.ca > www.merlin.mb.ca > > From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Peter Harrison > Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:53 AM > To: arin-consult at arin.net > Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > Dear Community, > > With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones may be invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one method. > > This link explains some of the options: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods > > We will need to balance the range of options with those provided by current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. Investigations are being made by staff and they will make recommendations to the board based on their research into our needs, best practices, practicability, relative merit, legal implications and systems availability. > > The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this is a good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we are working in the best interest of the members and the region they serve when evaluating the choices presented. > > As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate multiple forms of voting that may be required in future. The concern that this could lead to opportunistic changes to systems each election cycle is sound. We will investigate ways to ensure this does not happen with possible bylaw wording to meet these and other goals. > > The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a workable solution and concern for the membership has been evident every step of the way. These consultations are the result of over two years of research and were not taken lightly. We will continue to work to maintain this excellent collaboration. > > Thank you for your feedback. > > Peter > > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Consult > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing > List (ARIN-consult at arin.net ). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services > Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > > > > > This communication is confidential. Frontier only sends and receives email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.frontier.com/email_disclaimer . > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Consult > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing > List (ARIN-consult at arin.net ). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services > Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Fri Jan 21 19:54:17 2022 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2022 16:54:17 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <2e0f990c-aaef-a4d5-8b5d-560ea0ab7d10@quark.net> Message-ID: <46065E97-A320-4FD0-B7DF-C8F86334D04C@delong.com> I will disagree strongly here. I have, at various times, been the Voting DMR (or whatever it was called at the time) for as many as 5 organizations. All were clients at the time. (The total is well over 5, but the max at one time was 5). Most of the time, most of the clients instructed me as ?use your best judgment, you are more familiar with the parties in question.?. Occasionally, a client would ask for a summary of my views on the candidates and then instruct me how they wanted me to vote. In all cases, I absolutely voted in the best interest of each client (unless voting according to their specific instructions) with their vote. Most of the time this did not require any split voting. On a few occasions, it did. Even though I?m not currently voting on behalf of any ARIN members other than myself, I would oppose any effort to eliminate the possibility of contractors voting on behalf of their clients if authorized to do so by said client. Owen > On Jan 10, 2022, at 13:01 , Azinger, Marla wrote: > > If ARIN is looking for people that actually want to be involved to cast the voting and really care, the votes would best be cast by anything other than a proxy. > > I find proxy voters don?t always care what the desire of the company is and there is no validation being done they casted votes how the owner of the vote would actually want. > > I?m not a fan of proxy this day in age. Proxy to me is a throw back to before online voting occurred. There?s no reason a company cant vote on their own. > > > Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management > O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com > www.frontier.com > > > From: Adam Thompson > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 12:02 PM > To: Azinger, Marla ; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net > Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > Not sure that?s low-hanging fruit, tbh. Besides MERLIN, I still have voting rights for ? 3? local ISPs, who are all aware of that and OK with that. In any other arena, that?s just holding a proxy vote, which is not a big deal. > What sort of problems have you seen in this area (that I obviously haven?t)? > -Adam > > Adam Thompson > Consultant, Infrastructure Services > > 100 - 135 Innovation Drive > Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 > (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) > athompson at merlin.mb.ca > www.merlin.mb.ca > > From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Azinger, Marla > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:53 PM > To: andrew.dul at quark.net ; arin-consult at arin.net > Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > All of this is gaming no matter how you slice it. > > Silly me. I looked at the title and thought efforts were under way to stop one person from casting votes for companies they don?t actually work for but I didn?t read that in the write up. I would have thought we?d start there? if anything needs modification? > > Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management > O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com > www.frontier.com > > > From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Andrew Dul > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:40 AM > To: arin-consult at arin.net > Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links. > > > Perhaps a simple question, but "how" will the current board insure that future board(s) do not capriciously change the election mechanisms in the future? > > Making the changes to the "election process" subject to a majority vote of the membership and having that right inserted into the bylaws might be one method... > > Thanks, > Andrew > > On 1/7/2022 10:31 AM, Peter Harrison wrote: > Adam, > > As stated before, it is the Board's fiduciary responsibility to ensure that a change of this magnitude is equitable and not vulnerable to capricious change. We will act appropriately based on this feedback. > > Peter > > > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:03 AM Adam Thompson > wrote: > Peter, I don?t have a problem with STV. I do have a problem with the board having the latitude ? unfettered ? to keep changing voting systems without further bylaw amendments. The type of voting structure, particularly when deviating from the norm that?s baked into Virginia law, should then be baked into the bylaws so that it can?t change in the middle of the night, perhaps even during an election. > > Do I trust the current board to not pull stuff like that? Yeah, probably, I think... (In fact, can I even name the current board members? No. But that?s a different problem.) Am I willing to blindly trust every future board that might exist? Absolutely not. I?ve seen how boards can be co-opted, infiltrated, and/or ?turned to the dark side? (so to speak) elsewhere. > > As far as the consultation?s goal to determine whether STV is OK or not? Yes, it is good. This is an excellent move overall. > > -Adam > > Adam Thompson > Consultant, Infrastructure Services > > 100 - 135 Innovation Drive > Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 > (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) > athompson at merlin.mb.ca > www.merlin.mb.ca > > From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Peter Harrison > Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:53 AM > To: arin-consult at arin.net > Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections > > Dear Community, > > With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones may be invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one method. > > This link explains some of the options: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods > > We will need to balance the range of options with those provided by current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. Investigations are being made by staff and they will make recommendations to the board based on their research into our needs, best practices, practicability, relative merit, legal implications and systems availability. > > The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this is a good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we are working in the best interest of the members and the region they serve when evaluating the choices presented. > > As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate multiple forms of voting that may be required in future. The concern that this could lead to opportunistic changes to systems each election cycle is sound. We will investigate ways to ensure this does not happen with possible bylaw wording to meet these and other goals. > > The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a workable solution and concern for the membership has been evident every step of the way. These consultations are the result of over two years of research and were not taken lightly. We will continue to work to maintain this excellent collaboration. > > Thank you for your feedback. > > Peter > > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Consult > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing > List (ARIN-consult at arin.net ). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services > Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > > > > > This communication is confidential. Frontier only sends and receives email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.frontier.com/email_disclaimer . > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Consult > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing > List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services > Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paul at egate.net Sat Jan 22 11:55:15 2022 From: paul at egate.net (Paul Andersen) Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2022 16:55:15 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: <46065E97-A320-4FD0-B7DF-C8F86334D04C@delong.com> References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <2e0f990c-aaef-a4d5-8b5d-560ea0ab7d10@quark.net> <46065E97-A320-4FD0-B7DF-C8F86334D04C@delong.com> Message-ID: <75BD35AD-F256-4D12-94D4-4407A15EE998@egate.net> There are some good arguments on both sides; however, I see a pragmatic problem of enforcement. We?re talking 28 countries and in the US/Canada alone you have 60+ jurisdictions all with various employer/contractor law. This is before we start digging into corporate structures where the current voter is employed by Entity A but is the DMR or whole owned subsidy Entity B and the DMR of a partner company where their employer has a minority stake, etc etc. And how do we flag these? Do we dig into the relationship of every voter to the entity? I think pragmatically putting restrictions who a member organization can designate could be a large overhead on ARIN. -p On Jan 21, 2022, at 7:54 PM, Owen DeLong via ARIN-consult > wrote: I will disagree strongly here. I have, at various times, been the Voting DMR (or whatever it was called at the time) for as many as 5 organizations. All were clients at the time. (The total is well over 5, but the max at one time was 5). Most of the time, most of the clients instructed me as ?use your best judgment, you are more familiar with the parties in question.?. Occasionally, a client would ask for a summary of my views on the candidates and then instruct me how they wanted me to vote. In all cases, I absolutely voted in the best interest of each client (unless voting according to their specific instructions) with their vote. Most of the time this did not require any split voting. On a few occasions, it did. Even though I?m not currently voting on behalf of any ARIN members other than myself, I would oppose any effort to eliminate the possibility of contractors voting on behalf of their clients if authorized to do so by said client. Owen On Jan 10, 2022, at 13:01 , Azinger, Marla > wrote: If ARIN is looking for people that actually want to be involved to cast the voting and really care, the votes would best be cast by anything other than a proxy. I find proxy voters don?t always care what the desire of the company is and there is no validation being done they casted votes how the owner of the vote would actually want. I?m not a fan of proxy this day in age. Proxy to me is a throw back to before online voting occurred. There?s no reason a company cant vote on their own. Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com www.frontier.com From: Adam Thompson > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 12:02 PM To: Azinger, Marla >; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Not sure that?s low-hanging fruit, tbh. Besides MERLIN, I still have voting rights for ? 3? local ISPs, who are all aware of that and OK with that. In any other arena, that?s just holding a proxy vote, which is not a big deal. What sort of problems have you seen in this area (that I obviously haven?t)? -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Azinger, Marla Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:53 PM To: andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections All of this is gaming no matter how you slice it. Silly me. I looked at the title and thought efforts were under way to stop one person from casting votes for companies they don?t actually work for but I didn?t read that in the write up. I would have thought we?d start there? if anything needs modification? Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com www.frontier.com From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Andrew Dul Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:40 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections ________________________________ WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links. ________________________________ Perhaps a simple question, but "how" will the current board insure that future board(s) do not capriciously change the election mechanisms in the future? Making the changes to the "election process" subject to a majority vote of the membership and having that right inserted into the bylaws might be one method... Thanks, Andrew On 1/7/2022 10:31 AM, Peter Harrison wrote: Adam, As stated before, it is the Board's fiduciary responsibility to ensure that a change of this magnitude is equitable and not vulnerable to capricious change. We will act appropriately based on this feedback. Peter On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:03 AM Adam Thompson > wrote: Peter, I don?t have a problem with STV. I do have a problem with the board having the latitude ? unfettered ? to keep changing voting systems without further bylaw amendments. The type of voting structure, particularly when deviating from the norm that?s baked into Virginia law, should then be baked into the bylaws so that it can?t change in the middle of the night, perhaps even during an election. Do I trust the current board to not pull stuff like that? Yeah, probably, I think... (In fact, can I even name the current board members? No. But that?s a different problem.) Am I willing to blindly trust every future board that might exist? Absolutely not. I?ve seen how boards can be co-opted, infiltrated, and/or ?turned to the dark side? (so to speak) elsewhere. As far as the consultation?s goal to determine whether STV is OK or not? Yes, it is good. This is an excellent move overall. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Peter Harrison Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:53 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Dear Community, With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones may be invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one method. This link explains some of the options: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods We will need to balance the range of options with those provided by current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. Investigations are being made by staff and they will make recommendations to the board based on their research into our needs, best practices, practicability, relative merit, legal implications and systems availability. The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this is a good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we are working in the best interest of the members and the region they serve when evaluating the choices presented. As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate multiple forms of voting that may be required in future. The concern that this could lead to opportunistic changes to systems each election cycle is sound. We will investigate ways to ensure this does not happen with possible bylaw wording to meet these and other goals. The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a workable solution and concern for the membership has been evident every step of the way. These consultations are the result of over two years of research and were not taken lightly. We will continue to work to maintain this excellent collaboration. Thank you for your feedback. Peter _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. ________________________________ This communication is confidential. Frontier only sends and receives email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.frontier.com/email_disclaimer. _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From athompso at athompso.net Sat Jan 22 13:15:36 2022 From: athompso at athompso.net (Adam Thompson) Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2022 18:15:36 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: <75BD35AD-F256-4D12-94D4-4407A15EE998@egate.net> References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <2e0f990c-aaef-a4d5-8b5d-560ea0ab7d10@quark.net> <46065E97-A320-4FD0-B7DF-C8F86334D04C@delong.com> <75BD35AD-F256-4D12-94D4-4407A15EE998@egate.net> Message-ID: (Can?t find the right message to reply to? and I?m replying wearing the wrong hat? oh well. I?ve got the same view under each hat, anyway.) I strongly agree with Owen ? one of my upstreams at $DAYJOB, a significant regional LIR in their own right, has no employees whatsoever (as in, zero): everyone involved is either a contractor or a (volunteer) board member. They?re a perfectly valid legal entity here, they?re a member of ARIN in good standing, and their stakeholder community (which includes me, wearing my work hat) deserves a vote. The non-employee who would normally be tasked (by the non-employee board) with voting is a contractor. Restricting voters to employees might have some benefits, but it would also utterly disenfranchise a non-trivial number of ARIN members, which is unacceptable in both Canadian and American philosophies of governance. (I don?t know enough about the various Caribbean political philosophies to comment about them.) Marla?s arguments appear to come from an unfamiliarity with the diversity of organizational (and taxation!) structures that exist within ARIN?s membership. I agree with Paul here, that attempting to enforce any voter restrictions at the ARIN level would be, in any practical sense, unfeasible. -Adam Thompson From: ARIN-consult On Behalf Of Paul Andersen Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2022 10:55 AM To: Owen DeLong ; Azinger, Marla ; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections There are some good arguments on both sides; however, I see a pragmatic problem of enforcement. We?re talking 28 countries and in the US/Canada alone you have 60+ jurisdictions all with various employer/contractor law. This is before we start digging into corporate structures where the current voter is employed by Entity A but is the DMR or whole owned subsidy Entity B and the DMR of a partner company where their employer has a minority stake, etc etc. And how do we flag these? Do we dig into the relationship of every voter to the entity? I think pragmatically putting restrictions who a member organization can designate could be a large overhead on ARIN. -p On Jan 21, 2022, at 7:54 PM, Owen DeLong via ARIN-consult > wrote: I will disagree strongly here. I have, at various times, been the Voting DMR (or whatever it was called at the time) for as many as 5 organizations. All were clients at the time. (The total is well over 5, but the max at one time was 5). Most of the time, most of the clients instructed me as ?use your best judgment, you are more familiar with the parties in question.?. Occasionally, a client would ask for a summary of my views on the candidates and then instruct me how they wanted me to vote. In all cases, I absolutely voted in the best interest of each client (unless voting according to their specific instructions) with their vote. Most of the time this did not require any split voting. On a few occasions, it did. Even though I?m not currently voting on behalf of any ARIN members other than myself, I would oppose any effort to eliminate the possibility of contractors voting on behalf of their clients if authorized to do so by said client. Owen On Jan 10, 2022, at 13:01 , Azinger, Marla > wrote: If ARIN is looking for people that actually want to be involved to cast the voting and really care, the votes would best be cast by anything other than a proxy. I find proxy voters don?t always care what the desire of the company is and there is no validation being done they casted votes how the owner of the vote would actually want. I?m not a fan of proxy this day in age. Proxy to me is a throw back to before online voting occurred. There?s no reason a company cant vote on their own. Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com www.frontier.com From: Adam Thompson > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 12:02 PM To: Azinger, Marla >; andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: RE: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Not sure that?s low-hanging fruit, tbh. Besides MERLIN, I still have voting rights for ? 3? local ISPs, who are all aware of that and OK with that. In any other arena, that?s just holding a proxy vote, which is not a big deal. What sort of problems have you seen in this area (that I obviously haven?t)? -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Azinger, Marla Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:53 PM To: andrew.dul at quark.net; arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections All of this is gaming no matter how you slice it. Silly me. I looked at the title and thought efforts were under way to stop one person from casting votes for companies they don?t actually work for but I didn?t read that in the write up. I would have thought we?d start there? if anything needs modification? Marla Azinger | SPVR, IP Management O 585-413-9128 | marla.azinger at ftr.com www.frontier.com From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Andrew Dul Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:40 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections ________________________________ WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links. ________________________________ Perhaps a simple question, but "how" will the current board insure that future board(s) do not capriciously change the election mechanisms in the future? Making the changes to the "election process" subject to a majority vote of the membership and having that right inserted into the bylaws might be one method... Thanks, Andrew On 1/7/2022 10:31 AM, Peter Harrison wrote: Adam, As stated before, it is the Board's fiduciary responsibility to ensure that a change of this magnitude is equitable and not vulnerable to capricious change. We will act appropriately based on this feedback. Peter On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:03 AM Adam Thompson > wrote: Peter, I don?t have a problem with STV. I do have a problem with the board having the latitude ? unfettered ? to keep changing voting systems without further bylaw amendments. The type of voting structure, particularly when deviating from the norm that?s baked into Virginia law, should then be baked into the bylaws so that it can?t change in the middle of the night, perhaps even during an election. Do I trust the current board to not pull stuff like that? Yeah, probably, I think... (In fact, can I even name the current board members? No. But that?s a different problem.) Am I willing to blindly trust every future board that might exist? Absolutely not. I?ve seen how boards can be co-opted, infiltrated, and/or ?turned to the dark side? (so to speak) elsewhere. As far as the consultation?s goal to determine whether STV is OK or not? Yes, it is good. This is an excellent move overall. -Adam Adam Thompson Consultant, Infrastructure Services 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson at merlin.mb.ca www.merlin.mb.ca From: ARIN-consult > On Behalf Of Peter Harrison Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:53 AM To: arin-consult at arin.net Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections Dear Community, With STV there are many ways to re-allocate votes, and new ones may be invented. The videos presented previously illustrated one method. This link explains some of the options: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Comparison_of_ranked_voting_methods We will need to balance the range of options with those provided by current and future vendors of ARIN?s voting systems. Investigations are being made by staff and they will make recommendations to the board based on their research into our needs, best practices, practicability, relative merit, legal implications and systems availability. The purpose of the consultation is to get a sense of whether this is a good idea overall. The board will work hard to ensure that we are working in the best interest of the members and the region they serve when evaluating the choices presented. As John explained, the bylaw modification was made to accommodate multiple forms of voting that may be required in future. The concern that this could lead to opportunistic changes to systems each election cycle is sound. We will investigate ways to ensure this does not happen with possible bylaw wording to meet these and other goals. The Governance Working Group has worked very closely with both the executive team and staff on this consultation. Their support for a workable solution and concern for the membership has been evident every step of the way. These consultations are the result of over two years of research and were not taken lightly. We will continue to work to maintain this excellent collaboration. Thank you for your feedback. Peter _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. ________________________________ This communication is confidential. Frontier only sends and receives email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.frontier.com/email_disclaimer. _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From geek at jorhett.com Wed Jan 26 16:49:13 2022 From: geek at jorhett.com (Jo Rhett) Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2022 13:49:13 -0800 Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Implementing Single Transferrable Voting for ARIN Elections In-Reply-To: <58504D7D-D2BE-4A02-BCBF-E0B89B3AA6CF@delong.com> References: <09C52EF7-DA66-4C0B-9E7F-CC604E862FB7@delong.com> <341ACC8E-CC92-4DE7-B721-A37AF2656B8D@arin.net> <2e0f990c-aaef-a4d5-8b5d-560ea0ab7d10@quark.net> <58504D7D-D2BE-4A02-BCBF-E0B89B3AA6CF@delong.com> Message-ID: <1F57D1E4-88F1-4A58-8915-FD160F0B6A9E@jorhett.com> > I would accept ?Has no business affiliation with? or ?Is not an authorized agent of? or other similar language I think ?an authorized agent? is key. There are many people with affiliations or who are even employees that a business may not desire to vote on their behalf.