General Assembly Voting Review - Report from the Committee

The ESA Executive acted upon this decision and appointed 4 ESA members based on two criteria: 

1) Not to be an elected member of the previous ESA Executive (2019-2021); 

2) Having been the most voted in the last election for the new ESA Executive (2021-2023). 

The undersigned persons were appointed for the committee in charge of reviewing the votes. The committee has conducted a thorough revision of each of the 6 voting procedures (a 7th was considered null, and therefore was repeated at the same assembly). This committee had access to the following documentation: 

• Raw excel files with the voting results for each vote
• Revised version of the excel files with the voting
• Video recording of the GA
• Chat comments made during the GA 
• Preliminary minutes

A systematic review of all the votes has now been performed. There were three areas that required our best attention. Each area and the outcome of our review is summarized below:

• We considered valid the votes of members in good standing and who provided their full name and email address in the form. Availability of personal details was a necessary requirement to enable the committee to verify the vote. There was only a small number of votes which were discarded for these reasons. This verification step did not change the final result of any of the motions.
   

• Given that there was some confusion around the voting system, and because the application enabled members to vote multiple times, we made sure that nobody’s vote was counted more than once on the same motion. In case of multiple voting, we decided to recount the results in two ways to check for consistency: considering the first and the last vote. Either way, the number of votes did not change the final result of any of the motions. Finally, the number of last votes in case of multiple voting was the one included in the minutes. 
   

• In the chat, several people expressed that they experienced difficulties in voting due to several reasons. The committee has double-checked every single case, and only one ESA member was not able to vote regarding one of the motions. This person was also able to vote in other motions. Again, we concluded that this did not change the final results of any of the motions.

As a committee, we would like to make the following recommendations for forthcoming voting arrangements during online GAs:

• to secure more time for members to vote in each motion;
• to circulate the documents in advance;
• to include the “abstain” option in all of the ballots.

By sharing the details of the reviewing results, the committee remains at your disposal to make any further clarification on the process, always preserving the right of privacy of all ESA members.

With our best wishes,

Ana Cristina Santos     Loukia-Maria Fratsea                Pertti Alasuutari              Teresa Sordé

COUNTING VERIFICATION REPORT

(*) In cases of multiple voting, considering valid the first vote. Check for members to be in good standing was also performed at this stage.

(*) In cases of multiple voting, considering valid the last vote.