NRS member Jason has posted this on APNIC mailing list, NRS membership thanks Jason for raising this important issue - please read the details below.
Let's hope APNIC resolve it immediately, NRS will keep you posted.
The APNIC election website page is showing clear bias in favour of the existing EC members seeking re-election at the expense of the two other candidates. Only the three existing EC members have their names prominently listed with one click through to their biographies. Take a look: https://2024.apricot.net/elections/about
The two other candidates, Thomas Dragono and Rob Thomas, are not named on the front page. They are listed with the other nominees - which, whilst the list is prominently listed - means that they require two clicks to reach their biography.
This may not seem to you like bias, but experts in elections say it is. This type of bias is not allowed in best practice, free and fair elections as it is recognised as providing the incumbent with an advantage in both name recognition and name recall as well ease of accessing their election campaign information. Both Thomas and Rob have grounds to complain about their treatment. (I am not sure if they have, and it is entirely up to them).
If APNIC staff need to understand the importance of this matter, can they think of the Australian government (State or Federal) issuing official election communications that names only 3 out of 5 candidates on the front of the leaflet along with instructions on how to vote? Perhaps they could take a look here to see how it's done in Queensland. https://www.ecq.qld.gov.au/elections/election-events/2020-election-events2/2020-state-general-election
This bias can be immediately resolved by APNIC by either removing the names and links of the three incumbents from the front page or adding Thomas Dragono and Rob Thomas to the front page with a direct link to their biographies. APNIC should seek advice on what rebalance they can offer both Mr Dragono and Mr Thomas. With the problems with the outsourced voting system, restrictions on candidate eligibility, and now this clear candidate bias, APNIC is not coming out of this 2024 election well and they will have to answer for their mistakes.
For the 2025 elections, I suggest that APNIC enroll on election awareness training programme so that they understand how to run a free and fair election properly. Alternatively, they could consult with ARIN who have a great track record in running well managed, independent, impartial, free and fair campaigns that encourage active community participation. Take a look at the election page on ARIN’s website to see how well-run elections for RIR should be done. All RIRs should take note and follow ARIN’s example on true community engagement and fair elections https://www.arin.net/participate/oversight/elections/
Despite these serious problems about election fairness, I still encourage everyone to vote. Let's hope APNIC acknowledge their error and take immediate action to rectify it.