Domain Manage

Voting rights allocation error - election void?

Discussion in 'Nominet General Information' started by Whois-Search, Sep 27, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Whois-Search United Kingdom

    Whois-Search Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2004
    Posts:
    1,567
    Likes Received:
    27
    As sent via nom-announce and on the nominet website:

    Allocation of Voting Rights

    This means Nominet on the night before a board election Nominet corrected the voting rights allocation figures on their websites:

    http://www.nic.uk/digitalAssets/9172_voting_rights_26092006.pdf

    The old version can be found here:

    http://www.nominet.org.uk/digitalAssets/9082_voting_rights_29082006.pdf

    See members like:

    WAS: S00983 ANY-Web Limited 3,016

    NOW: S00983 ANY-Web Limited 18,723

    This means some members now have more votes than they thought they had until last night! Also we also based our election campaign on the figures.

    Bob Gilbert acknowledged the error at the AGM however both Angus and I told him the election should be re-run.

    Bob Gilbert he will get Popularis Ltd to 'look at the figures'.

    It may well be legal to do this however will Popularis Ltd risk their reputation on this and declare it a fair election?

    I feel very upset indeed by how now I could/not be elected based upon the wrong figures.

    However I do accept mistakes happen .........
     
  2. Domain Forum

    Acorn Domains Elite Member

    Joined:
    1999
    Messages:
    Many
    Likes Received:
    Lots
     
  3. grandin United Kingdom

    grandin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2006
    Posts:
    1,304
    Likes Received:
    10
    However I do accept mistakes happen

    However I do accept mistakes happen...yes Andrew they do....more often than not in some domains

    Did you win based on dodgy voting?

    Lee
     
  4. fred United Kingdom

    fred Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2005
    Posts:
    901
    Likes Received:
    19
    What difference does it actually make as long as the right numbers are actually used to work out the result?

    In what way?

    Surely you will/will not be elected based on the correct figures?
     
  5. Whois-Search United Kingdom

    Whois-Search Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2004
    Posts:
    1,567
    Likes Received:
    27
    The result is not until tomorrow - so i'm posting this before the result.

    Some members might not have voted because on the old allocation they may have say 251 votes and now they may have say 3000 votes.

    Also when your a candidate like Peter Gradwell who targets the "bigger tag holders" then suddenly even companies like Any-Web have more voting power under the new figures.
     
  6. fred United Kingdom

    fred Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2005
    Posts:
    901
    Likes Received:
    19
    Well, given that even 1 vote can make a difference, if people don't vote then that's their choice. It didn't take much effort, and there was no cost (except a tiny bit of ink) to vote, so not voting because of the number of votes they thought they had is a poor excuse!

    Fair enough, but would you have done anything differently?
     
  7. Whois-Search United Kingdom

    Whois-Search Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2004
    Posts:
    1,567
    Likes Received:
    27
    I don't have the same "contacts" as the others do to have done anything different.

    However the point is I didn't find out about the "error" until Angus mentioned it in the AGM room and could no longer do anything about it.

    If we all had the correct figures since 29/08/2006 then maybe we could have done things different.
     
  8. mishmash

    mishmash Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2005
    Posts:
    160
    Likes Received:
    12
    If the results are shown to be the same under both allocations of votes then I think Nominet will have got away with it. If not I think the election ought to be re-run.

    If Nominet don't do that voluntarily I don't think that it should be down to an individual member, or group of members to bring legal action as suggested during the AGM - I would think it reasonable for the Government - presumably the DTI, to step in.
     
  9. Beasty

    Beasty Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2006
    Posts:
    595
    Likes Received:
    8
    Indeed that is probably true when it's one member-one vote or something equally straightforward.

    However, if people (mistakenly) thought their view was incidental because of the weighted voting system - who's to say that the error did not impact on how/if they voted. One could say that if you invent a complex voting arrangment - you have strict liability to get it right.

    I remember a vote involving a PLC where a small class of shareholders was accdientally left out or given a reduced voting allocation. When the error was discovered, the law firm handling the meeting (or at least their indemnity insurers) had to pick up the bill for a second EGM.

    There was never an issue that the result would have been different - the issue was proper due process pure and simple. Given that it would have cost a substantial sum - I doubt it was done for fun - but because they had to.
     
  10. olebean

    olebean Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2005
    Posts:
    2,216
    Likes Received:
    29
    What I would like to know is..

    When did they discover the error, did Fay and Gordon (being directors) know before the other candidates and who made the error
     
  11. retired member 1

    retired member 1 Retired Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    634
    Likes Received:
    15
    My voting rights went from 251 > 900+ IIRC, I didn't vote in any case, missed the deadline by someway.

    Good luck to all the candidates.
     
  12. Whois-Search United Kingdom

    Whois-Search Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2004
    Posts:
    1,567
    Likes Received:
    27
    Nominet have not yet said when they discovered the error. Denesh Bhabuta just said this on Nom-Steer:

    Also during the AGM break Gordon Dick (re-standing) came straight up to me and said:

     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. gordon United Kingdom

    gordon Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    66
    Likes Received:
    2
    Andrew,
    Your quote of me is slightly wrong. I said that the first time I saw the corrected voting rights was after the error was announced on nom-announce by Nominet. That was the day before the AGM.

    I believe the nom-announce was sent about 12noon and I first saw the correct rights while sitting in the airport waiting to go to the AGM at approximately 1245.

    Gordon
     
  14. olebean

    olebean Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2005
    Posts:
    2,216
    Likes Received:
    29
    Gordon / Andrew

    IMO that clears the issue of electoral advantage, there is of course the issue of who appears to have made such a blunder, whether the errors have been corrected
     
  15. Whois-Search United Kingdom

    Whois-Search Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2004
    Posts:
    1,567
    Likes Received:
    27
    I apologize Gordon - that will teach me not to have checked my email on Hilton Serve.........or Jay Net
     
  16. grandin United Kingdom

    grandin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2006
    Posts:
    1,304
    Likes Received:
    10
    who won

    Who won? Do they now get paid? Was it all worth it? Personally the timing was a bit crap given .mobi went live tues...luckily kept my eye on the ball and secured....kebabs.mobi

    Lee
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2006
  17. Beasty

    Beasty Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2006
    Posts:
    595
    Likes Received:
    8
    Good question - anyone nearer the action know anything yet?

    I believe that the non-execs on the board are paid - as is normal for such things - though I have no idea how much. I believe it's the PAB who are not paid.
     
  18. grandin United Kingdom

    grandin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2006
    Posts:
    1,304
    Likes Received:
    10
    bump skip jog

    beasty when you say 'Good question' do you truly mean good assertion and you put your post in the wrong thread?????????????????????????????????????????

    Lee
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2006
  19. Hazel Pegg

    Hazel Pegg Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    315
    Likes Received:
    12

    September 28 2006
    The results of the 2006 Board election which took place at this week's AGM will be posted in due course here on the Nominet web site. We anticipate them being available during the afternoon of 29 September 2006.
    Latest News
     
  20. Beasty

    Beasty Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2006
    Posts:
    595
    Likes Received:
    8
    Hi Lee

    No. You asked "Who won?" - I replied "Good question". :confused:
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2006
  21. Beasty

    Beasty Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2006
    Posts:
    595
    Likes Received:
    8
    Hi Hazel

    I thought yesterday people were saying to expect the election results today - now I see you've linked to news that they will be out tomorrow. Some reason for the delay?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page