District 4- questionable result

[minionofmidas]

Anyway, you guys wonder why everyone is so damn confussed all the time, it is because you guys change the law with every single tiny irregularity that comes up.

I don't recall the law regarding how to handle these types of votes having ever been changed. I agree that it needs to be clearer, however. The requirement to have an avatar or a statement in the profile signature should be in the voting booth thread. I'm just offering that as a suggestion for next time.

Good idea. An even better idea might be to remove the requirement entirely, as it doesn't really serve any purpose.

[minionofmidas]

Anyway, you guys wonder why everyone is so damn confussed all the time, it is because you guys change the law with every single tiny irregularity that comes up.

I don't recall the law regarding how to handle these types of votes having ever been changed. I agree that it needs to be clearer, however. The requirement to have an avatar or a statement in the profile signature should be in the voting booth thread. I'm just offering that as a suggestion for next time.

Good idea. An even better idea might be to remove the requirement entirely, as it doesn't really serve any purpose.

It was made law as to cut back on confusion.  It appears that the "Iron Rule of Unanticipated Consequences" has struck again.  It appreas that we have made a bigger mess for ourselves.  That does not, howver, change the current status of the law.

I was talking about for the next election.
I don't care who wins this really. Harry and WMS will both make fine Senators.

[minionofmidas]

Given that the initial rule, as I understand it, was that no posts should be edited

And the point of that was that you shouldn't be able to change your vote midships for tactical reasons, as happened in some of the votes during the constitutional convention.
I urge that Defarge's vote be counted for The Bulldog (it doesn't change the outcome) and the Senator be censured for this shameful piece of attempted election rigging.
I mean it, too, even though I know his motives were subjectively entirely honorable.

[minionofmidas]

Look... this is getting very nasty.
I don't really mind who wins this (I'm happy to work with either candidate) but this is getting out of control and isn't fair on Demohawk/Dave.

I'd also recommend a sit down and a cuppa.

Word.
I don't care about the "special election" part...for all I care they can seat WMS, he won't be a bad Senator. But I urge voting reform now:
The "no vote editing" rule should be precisized so it's totally clear that this is about changing who you vote for.
Even if you do this, your initial vote should be counted anyways.
Alternatively, we can just abolish the vote editing rule, leaving people free to change their minds until the final minute, although I prefer the first option. (Ironically, if we had had the second option, Hugh would be president now.)

Once we're at it, I'd like to ban write-ins and move the candidate registration deadline right to poll opening time.

[minionofmidas]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I agree with most of that... when I'm sworn in I'll introduce that as a bill (although it'd be better if a Senator from the outgoing Senate did it)

It'd be best if WMS (if he is seated) does it, actually.

[minionofmidas]

It would make the task of the SOFA pretty difficult, though. (Although I guess the thread might be locked at poll closing time, preventing later edits, to give the SOFA the time to count the ballots.)

[minionofmidas]

It would make the task of the SOFA pretty difficult, though. (Although I guess the thread might be locked at poll closing time, preventing later edits, to give the SOFA the time to count the ballots.)

Yes. As long as the moderator agrees to be online at the exact time that the polls closed, to lock the thread, it would work.

Not to mention that if a ballot was edited after poll closing, we would know it anyway. If a ballot was deleted altogether, however, we wouldn't have legal proof that it was ever there, but we would have clear eyewitness accounts. Also, we would perhaps have, in the case of Demo Hawk's vote, posts from others who quoted his post.

If tampering with your own ballot were entirely legal, we probably wouldn't have quotes and might not have eyewitnesses.
Of course we would be able to see if a ballot has been edited after polls close, but we might not know what the change was.
If the mod is online at the time, though, there's no problem. Maybe just give Fritz Moderating powers.