[PDB-gov] Vote collection and counting

Chris Caputo secretary at peeringdb.com
Fri Nov 6 12:58:54 PST 2015

Great points.

If the consensus here is to use BigPulse, I'm in and will do what the 
community wants.

Any objections to using BigPulse?


On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, Dave Temkin wrote:
> Chris,
> We agree on so much - but "I think it's hard" isn't really a reason to 
> not use an impartial vote counting mechanism. What if Richard runs for 
> the Board? How do you then fairly select another party?
> List of familiar organizations known to use BigPulse:
> Torix
> Open-IX
> We have representatives from many of those organizations on this list; 
> I'm confident that they are all willing to lend a hand in getting it set 
> up. I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is and sponsor the cost.
> Regards,
> -Dave
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 9:45 PM, Chris Caputo <secretary at peeringdb.com> wrote:
>       Dave,
>       As we navigate the minefield of differing viewpoints, the overriding goal
>       here is legitimacy.  I am motivated to run this election in a manner which
>       will not be challenged by reasonable people.  Thus I want to make sure you
>       and anyone else are satisfied with the fairness and openness of the
>       process.
>       In regards to my conflict of interest, it is important to repeat to all
>       here, members and candidates, that a future Board may choose to pay me for
>       organizational and/or financial services.  I am motivated to do a good and
>       honest job, both because it is the right thing to do, and because it may
>       reflect well on me in the eyes of a future Board.  I also understand that
>       I may not be retained, regardless of how well this process goes.
>       The plan I negotiated between Richard Turkbergen, Patrick Gilmore, Aaron
>       Hughes and Matthew Griswold, as part of having an open election, is to
>       have ballots go to secretary at peeringdb.com, with the alias being staffed
>       by Richard Turkbergen, Patrick Gilmore, and myself.
>       The benefit of having multiple parties receive the secretary@ emails is to
>       provide an auditing mechanism.
>       An issue has been raised in regards to Patrick receiving the emails, since
>       Patrick has also declared for the Board.  (He is one of the nine present
>       candidates.)
>       Patrick has agreed to be removed from secretary@, and that removal has
>       been completed.
>       That means that both Richard Turkbergen (née Richard Steenbergen, the
>       original creator of PeeringDB) and myself will receive the votes.
>       In regards to use of BigPulse or other voting services...
>       Keep in mind that an issue we have is that each vote will need to be
>       carefully checked to make sure that organizations are not duplicate
>       voting.  In additional each voter will need to be checked against the
>       PeeringDB database to make sure they match the member definition of
>       representing an active PeeringDB account.
>       I have experience running Board elections by hand, with a spreadsheet, and
>       am confident in my ability to do so.  I do not have experience in setting
>       up a BigPulse or other electronic voting service for a Board election, and
>       would be leery of screwing it up, thus destroying the progress we have
>       made.  I am concerned that a 3rd party runs the same risk.
>       In the future Matthew believes he will be able to integrate voting into
>       the website itself, so that these issues are handled and vote tabulation
>       is automated, but we do not have that for this election.  Hopefully it
>       will be tested and in place for the proposed April election.
>       Chris
>       On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, Dave Temkin wrote:
>       > Chris,
>       >
>       > Given there's a proposed commercial relationship between you and PDB,
>       > made by people up for election, wouldn't you call that a Conflict of
>       > Interest?
>       >
>       > Why not BigPulse, with a disinterested party a la most elections committees? 
>       >
>       > -Dave
>       >
>       > On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:14 PM, Chris Caputo <secretary at peeringdb.com> wrote:
>       >       Hi Anna,
>       >
>       >       That will be me, per:
>       >
>       >         http://lists.peeringdb.com/pipermail/pdb-gov/2015-October/000013.html
>       >
>       >       Thanks,
>       >       Chris
>       >
>       >       On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, Anna Claiborne wrote:
>       >       > Hello
>       >
>       >       > Who will be the responsible party for collecting and counting the votes
>       >       > in the upcoming PDB election? I wasn’t able to find any reference for
>       >       > this on https://www.caputo.com/pdb/ in the election statement or bylaws.
>       >       > Apologies if I missed it and it is stated somewhere.
>       >       >
>       >       > -Anna

More information about the Pdb-gov mailing list