A Case of POSSIBLE Voting Fraud

[Gustaf]

I'm glad that we agree on this, Gustaf. There are currently 4 votes in question (Boss Tweed, Bandit73, Better Red than Dead, and Beef)...I feel that all should stand. In none of the 4 cases was a first preference vote altered. Tweed and Beef merely edited party names which they had accidentally gotten wrong, Bandit forgot to vote for VP the first time, and BRTD merely added a second choice preference (which is highly unlikely to come into play anyway).

OK, good.

[Platypus]

As a candidate, I might challenge the votes of Beef and BRTD.

As you are a write-in candidate, I do not think you have the right to do so.

No matter what the reult of the election is, I will not challenge any votes. I think it would be a bit selfish of you to do s, Fritz, and unlike you.

[Fritz]

Don't worry, Hugh, I'm not going to challenge any votes as long as the Presidential votes aren't being challenged.

[Nym90]

Bump.

Some of these seem similar to the current D4 dispute, so this can be used as a reference.

[Gustaf]

There's a difference though in that my view of how fantasy politics should work wsa abandoned a long time ago. I don't think there's much point in trying to uphold it anymore since certain people and parties ruined the whole thing anyway.

Especially in the case of Harry who after all got elected by technicalities of the law.

[Jake]

It seems like here we have the Republicans and Common sense centrists supporting a black and white enforcement of the rules, while Democrats supporting voter ignorance and the belittling of the rules. Gabu's ballot said edited votes will not be counted. There is no controversy other than Nym, Harry, and fritz supporting a challenge of the outcome.

[Gustaf]

The thing is, I believed that fantasy elections should be handled the way most of us agreed on back then...that was one of the things the UAC was supposed to stand for. The kind of reactions we met proved that it would be hard to win and in the end we lost, plain and simple. Democrats, mostly, but also Republicans as well as some other people managed to remove most of the fun and gentle spirit from the fantasy elections and left us where we are now.

In today's context there can be no question that the current result should stand and the vote be thrown out.

And I'd like to point out that I hurt myself with my position back then and gain nothing from my position now.

[Nym90]

It seems like here we have the Republicans and Common sense centrists supporting a black and white enforcement of the rules, while Democrats supporting voter ignorance and the belittling of the rules. Gabu's ballot said edited votes will not be counted. There is no controversy other than Nym, Harry, and fritz supporting a challenge of the outcome.

My point is that back in June, everybody supported counting the vote. Republicans, Democrats, and Centrists alike. A lot of people, such as Gustaf, have since changed their positions. That's fine, people are allowed to change their mind, but at least folks like Gustaf are explaining why they have changed their position. I'm fine with that.

[Nym90]

There's a difference though in that my view of how fantasy politics should work wsa abandoned a long time ago. I don't think there's much point in trying to uphold it anymore since certain people and parties ruined the whole thing anyway.

Especially in the case of Harry who after all got elected by technicalities of the law.

Harry's original election was 2 months before the disputed votes in June, so I don't see how Harry's election in April could have led you to change your mind, since it had already happened by the time of the disputed votes in question on this thread.

Regarding that race, I agree that the remedy was poor, but there was no one else willing to run against Harry. 2 people voted for M as write-ins, but he wasn't even on the Forum anymore, and thus obviously couldn't be a Senator, as he wasn't even around to take the oath of office. Kind of an interesting contrast with the controversy about Bulldog's candidacy. Bulldog may not have been active, but he was a heck of a lot more active than M at that time (M didn't even want to run, and hadn't been on the Forum in many weeks) yet many of the same people who deride the Bulldog voters now fully supported electing someone to the Senate who was not even a candidate and hadn't even visited the Forum in a long time, nor did he even show up to take the oath of office after winning.

If M had shown up to take the oath, I would have supported his becoming a Senator. The fact that he was inactive was irrelevant to me, but he didn't show up, and the arguments about inactive members winning Senate seats that we are seeing now applied back then, too.

I'm sad to see that you no longer feel that all the votes should be counted, Gustaf. I'm glad that you were willing to explain why you changed your mind. I hope that if anyone else, such as Nation, Mr. Fresh, etc. have also changed their minds, they will also explain why.

I, for one, will continue to fight for a principle that was once nearly universally held in Atlasia, and now seems to be fading fast. The concept of counting all the votes.

[Jake]

There's a difference though in that my view of how fantasy politics should work wsa abandoned a long time ago. I don't think there's much point in trying to uphold it anymore since certain people and parties ruined the whole thing anyway.

Especially in the case of Harry who after all got elected by technicalities of the law.

Harry's original election was 2 months before the disputed votes in June, so I don't see how Harry's election in April could have led you to change your mind, since it had already happened by the time of the disputed votes in question on this thread.

Regarding that race, I agree that the remedy was poor, but there was no one else willing to run against Harry. 2 people voted for M as write-ins, but he wasn't even on the Forum anymore, and thus obviously couldn't be a Senator, as he wasn't even around to take the oath of office. Kind of an interesting contrast with the controversy about Bulldog's candidacy. Bulldog may not have been active, but he was a heck of a lot more active than M at that time (M didn't even want to run, and hadn't been on the Forum in many weeks) yet many of the same people who deride the Bulldog voters now fully supported electing someone to the Senate who was not even a candidate and hadn't even visited the Forum in a long time, nor did he even show up to take the oath of office after winning.

If M had shown up to take the oath, I would have supported his becoming a Senator. The fact that he was inactive was irrelevant to me, but he didn't show up, and the arguments about inactive members winning Senate seats that we are seeing now applied back then, too.

I'm sad to see that you no longer feel that all the votes should be counted, Gustaf. I'm glad that you were willing to explain why you changed your mind. I hope that if anyone else, such as Nation, Mr. Fresh, etc. have also changed their minds, they will also explain why.

I, for one, will continue to fight for a principle that was once nearly universally held in Atlasia, and now seems to be fading fast. The concept of counting all the votes.

Okay count all of Democratic Hawk's votes, all five of them, right. Or just the legal votes, which are none of them.

[Nym90]

There's a difference though in that my view of how fantasy politics should work wsa abandoned a long time ago. I don't think there's much point in trying to uphold it anymore since certain people and parties ruined the whole thing anyway.

Especially in the case of Harry who after all got elected by technicalities of the law.

Harry's original election was 2 months before the disputed votes in June, so I don't see how Harry's election in April could have led you to change your mind, since it had already happened by the time of the disputed votes in question on this thread.

Regarding that race, I agree that the remedy was poor, but there was no one else willing to run against Harry. 2 people voted for M as write-ins, but he wasn't even on the Forum anymore, and thus obviously couldn't be a Senator, as he wasn't even around to take the oath of office. Kind of an interesting contrast with the controversy about Bulldog's candidacy. Bulldog may not have been active, but he was a heck of a lot more active than M at that time (M didn't even want to run, and hadn't been on the Forum in many weeks) yet many of the same people who deride the Bulldog voters now fully supported electing someone to the Senate who was not even a candidate and hadn't even visited the Forum in a long time, nor did he even show up to take the oath of office after winning.

If M had shown up to take the oath, I would have supported his becoming a Senator. The fact that he was inactive was irrelevant to me, but he didn't show up, and the arguments about inactive members winning Senate seats that we are seeing now applied back then, too.

I'm sad to see that you no longer feel that all the votes should be counted, Gustaf. I'm glad that you were willing to explain why you changed your mind. I hope that if anyone else, such as Nation, Mr. Fresh, etc. have also changed their minds, they will also explain why.

I, for one, will continue to fight for a principle that was once nearly universally held in Atlasia, and now seems to be fading fast. The concept of counting all the votes.

Okay count all of Democratic Hawk's votes, all five of them, right. Or just the legal votes, which are none of them.

No, he should only be allowed to vote in the district in which he is registered.

What is the difference between Democratic Hawk's vote and the votes of BRTD, Beef, Boss Tweed, etc. in the June Elections? All of which were legally accepted with little or no opposition from anyone, Democrat, Republican, or UAC alike.

[Akno21]

There's a difference though in that my view of how fantasy politics should work wsa abandoned a long time ago. I don't think there's much point in trying to uphold it anymore since certain people and parties ruined the whole thing anyway.

Especially in the case of Harry who after all got elected by technicalities of the law.

Harry's original election was 2 months before the disputed votes in June, so I don't see how Harry's election in April could have led you to change your mind, since it had already happened by the time of the disputed votes in question on this thread.

Regarding that race, I agree that the remedy was poor, but there was no one else willing to run against Harry. 2 people voted for M as write-ins, but he wasn't even on the Forum anymore, and thus obviously couldn't be a Senator, as he wasn't even around to take the oath of office. Kind of an interesting contrast with the controversy about Bulldog's candidacy. Bulldog may not have been active, but he was a heck of a lot more active than M at that time (M didn't even want to run, and hadn't been on the Forum in many weeks) yet many of the same people who deride the Bulldog voters now fully supported electing someone to the Senate who was not even a candidate and hadn't even visited the Forum in a long time, nor did he even show up to take the oath of office after winning.

If M had shown up to take the oath, I would have supported his becoming a Senator. The fact that he was inactive was irrelevant to me, but he didn't show up, and the arguments about inactive members winning Senate seats that we are seeing now applied back then, too.

I'm sad to see that you no longer feel that all the votes should be counted, Gustaf. I'm glad that you were willing to explain why you changed your mind. I hope that if anyone else, such as Nation, Mr. Fresh, etc. have also changed their minds, they will also explain why.

I, for one, will continue to fight for a principle that was once nearly universally held in Atlasia, and now seems to be fading fast. The concept of counting all the votes.

Okay count all of Democratic Hawk's votes, all five of them, right. Or just the legal votes, which are none of them.

Regarding only the multiple vote, it has been counted like that before, only in the legal districts. DemoHawk made a mistake, just like Hockeydude made a mistake last time. He still voted where he should, so that vote counts.

[Jake]

There's a difference though in that my view of how fantasy politics should work wsa abandoned a long time ago. I don't think there's much point in trying to uphold it anymore since certain people and parties ruined the whole thing anyway.

Especially in the case of Harry who after all got elected by technicalities of the law.

Harry's original election was 2 months before the disputed votes in June, so I don't see how Harry's election in April could have led you to change your mind, since it had already happened by the time of the disputed votes in question on this thread.

Regarding that race, I agree that the remedy was poor, but there was no one else willing to run against Harry. 2 people voted for M as write-ins, but he wasn't even on the Forum anymore, and thus obviously couldn't be a Senator, as he wasn't even around to take the oath of office. Kind of an interesting contrast with the controversy about Bulldog's candidacy. Bulldog may not have been active, but he was a heck of a lot more active than M at that time (M didn't even want to run, and hadn't been on the Forum in many weeks) yet many of the same people who deride the Bulldog voters now fully supported electing someone to the Senate who was not even a candidate and hadn't even visited the Forum in a long time, nor did he even show up to take the oath of office after winning.

If M had shown up to take the oath, I would have supported his becoming a Senator. The fact that he was inactive was irrelevant to me, but he didn't show up, and the arguments about inactive members winning Senate seats that we are seeing now applied back then, too.

I'm sad to see that you no longer feel that all the votes should be counted, Gustaf. I'm glad that you were willing to explain why you changed your mind. I hope that if anyone else, such as Nation, Mr. Fresh, etc. have also changed their minds, they will also explain why.

I, for one, will continue to fight for a principle that was once nearly universally held in Atlasia, and now seems to be fading fast. The concept of counting all the votes.

Okay count all of Democratic Hawk's votes, all five of them, right. Or just the legal votes, which are none of them.

No, he should only be allowed to vote in the district in which he is registered.

What is the difference between Democratic Hawk's vote and the votes of BRTD, Beef, Boss Tweed, etc. in the June Elections? All of which were legally accepted with little or no opposition from anyone, Democrat, Republican, or UAC alike.

I wasn't on the fantasy boards in June, I joined in July. But, they shouldn't have counted, unless you forgot to mention to not edit your vote. Obviously, that was mentioned this election, the voter didn't comply, so his vote is thrown out. Black and White rule here.

And Akno, DemoHawk submitted an illegal vote for 5 seats. Precedent would have deamed that only his district 4 vote would count, but he made that vote illegal by editing his post. Therefore, his vote is illegal and isn't counted.

[Akno21]

There's a difference though in that my view of how fantasy politics should work wsa abandoned a long time ago. I don't think there's much point in trying to uphold it anymore since certain people and parties ruined the whole thing anyway.

Especially in the case of Harry who after all got elected by technicalities of the law.

Harry's original election was 2 months before the disputed votes in June, so I don't see how Harry's election in April could have led you to change your mind, since it had already happened by the time of the disputed votes in question on this thread.

Regarding that race, I agree that the remedy was poor, but there was no one else willing to run against Harry. 2 people voted for M as write-ins, but he wasn't even on the Forum anymore, and thus obviously couldn't be a Senator, as he wasn't even around to take the oath of office. Kind of an interesting contrast with the controversy about Bulldog's candidacy. Bulldog may not have been active, but he was a heck of a lot more active than M at that time (M didn't even want to run, and hadn't been on the Forum in many weeks) yet many of the same people who deride the Bulldog voters now fully supported electing someone to the Senate who was not even a candidate and hadn't even visited the Forum in a long time, nor did he even show up to take the oath of office after winning.

If M had shown up to take the oath, I would have supported his becoming a Senator. The fact that he was inactive was irrelevant to me, but he didn't show up, and the arguments about inactive members winning Senate seats that we are seeing now applied back then, too.

I'm sad to see that you no longer feel that all the votes should be counted, Gustaf. I'm glad that you were willing to explain why you changed your mind. I hope that if anyone else, such as Nation, Mr. Fresh, etc. have also changed their minds, they will also explain why.

I, for one, will continue to fight for a principle that was once nearly universally held in Atlasia, and now seems to be fading fast. The concept of counting all the votes.

Okay count all of Democratic Hawk's votes, all five of them, right. Or just the legal votes, which are none of them.

No, he should only be allowed to vote in the district in which he is registered.

What is the difference between Democratic Hawk's vote and the votes of BRTD, Beef, Boss Tweed, etc. in the June Elections? All of which were legally accepted with little or no opposition from anyone, Democrat, Republican, or UAC alike.

I wasn't on the fantasy boards in June, I joined in July. But, they shouldn't have counted, unless you forgot to mention to not edit your vote. Obviously, that was mentioned this election, the voter didn't comply, so his vote is thrown out. Black and White rule here.

And Akno, DemoHawk submitted an illegal vote for 5 seats. Precedent would have deamed that only his district 4 vote would count, but he made that vote illegal by editing his post. Therefore, his vote is illegal and isn't counted.

Fine, his vote may be illegal on the editing count, but not on the count of voting for other seats.

[Nym90]

There's a difference though in that my view of how fantasy politics should work wsa abandoned a long time ago. I don't think there's much point in trying to uphold it anymore since certain people and parties ruined the whole thing anyway.

Especially in the case of Harry who after all got elected by technicalities of the law.

Harry's original election was 2 months before the disputed votes in June, so I don't see how Harry's election in April could have led you to change your mind, since it had already happened by the time of the disputed votes in question on this thread.

Regarding that race, I agree that the remedy was poor, but there was no one else willing to run against Harry. 2 people voted for M as write-ins, but he wasn't even on the Forum anymore, and thus obviously couldn't be a Senator, as he wasn't even around to take the oath of office. Kind of an interesting contrast with the controversy about Bulldog's candidacy. Bulldog may not have been active, but he was a heck of a lot more active than M at that time (M didn't even want to run, and hadn't been on the Forum in many weeks) yet many of the same people who deride the Bulldog voters now fully supported electing someone to the Senate who was not even a candidate and hadn't even visited the Forum in a long time, nor did he even show up to take the oath of office after winning.

If M had shown up to take the oath, I would have supported his becoming a Senator. The fact that he was inactive was irrelevant to me, but he didn't show up, and the arguments about inactive members winning Senate seats that we are seeing now applied back then, too.

I'm sad to see that you no longer feel that all the votes should be counted, Gustaf. I'm glad that you were willing to explain why you changed your mind. I hope that if anyone else, such as Nation, Mr. Fresh, etc. have also changed their minds, they will also explain why.

I, for one, will continue to fight for a principle that was once nearly universally held in Atlasia, and now seems to be fading fast. The concept of counting all the votes.

Okay count all of Democratic Hawk's votes, all five of them, right. Or just the legal votes, which are none of them.

No, he should only be allowed to vote in the district in which he is registered.

What is the difference between Democratic Hawk's vote and the votes of BRTD, Beef, Boss Tweed, etc. in the June Elections? All of which were legally accepted with little or no opposition from anyone, Democrat, Republican, or UAC alike.

I wasn't on the fantasy boards in June, I joined in July. But, they shouldn't have counted, unless you forgot to mention to not edit your vote. Obviously, that was mentioned this election, the voter didn't comply, so his vote is thrown out. Black and White rule here.

And Akno, DemoHawk submitted an illegal vote for 5 seats. Precedent would have deamed that only his district 4 vote would count, but he made that vote illegal by editing his post. Therefore, his vote is illegal and isn't counted.

If you read the first couple pages of this very thread, you can see what happened in June. It was clearly stated that editing a vote would invalidate the vote. Everyone agreed that since the vote wasn't edited, only the post, the vote should count.

The requirement to not edit your vote was on the ballot in June, again as can be seen in this thread. That was the main reason why I bumped it up, so that people can see how this was handled before.

[Jake]

Fine, his vote may be illegal on the editing count, but not on the count of voting for other seats.

It is illegal for him to vote for 4 other elections, but that is not the point. The point is he edited his post and has no way of proving who he actually voted for.

[Nym90]

Fine, his vote may be illegal on the editing count, but not on the count of voting for other seats.

It is illegal for him to vote for 4 other elections, but that is not the point. The point is he edited his post and has no way of proving who he actually voted for.

I would think the plethora of witnesses who can attest to the fact that the vote itself wasn't changed should be sufficient, combined with past precedent, especially since it's unlikely that there will be any witnesses saying that it was changed. But it's up to the Court to determine the relevance of that.

[Jake]

Fine, his vote may be illegal on the editing count, but not on the count of voting for other seats.

It is illegal for him to vote for 4 other elections, but that is not the point. The point is he edited his post and has no way of proving who he actually voted for.

I would think the plethora of witnesses who can attest to the fact that the vote itself wasn't changed should be sufficient, combined with past precedent, especially since it's unlikely that there will be any witnesses saying that it was changed. But it's up to the Court to determine the relevance of that.

He deleted his vote. This debate doesn't matter, but we need an actual air tight defintion of what constitutes an editted vote.

[Nym90]

Fine, his vote may be illegal on the editing count, but not on the count of voting for other seats.

It is illegal for him to vote for 4 other elections, but that is not the point. The point is he edited his post and has no way of proving who he actually voted for.

I would think the plethora of witnesses who can attest to the fact that the vote itself wasn't changed should be sufficient, combined with past precedent, especially since it's unlikely that there will be any witnesses saying that it was changed. But it's up to the Court to determine the relevance of that.

He deleted his vote. This debate doesn't matter, but we need an actual air tight defintion of what constitutes an editted vote.

The votes are determined on the basis of how they stand at the time the polls closed. That's Fritz's position and I agree with it.

If Democratic Hawk does not want this to be pursued, then I would agree that it should be dropped. Merely deleting his vote post doesn't constitute enough evidence that he wants it dropped, in my opinion. His most recent statement on the matter indicated that he wanted it challenged.

[ilikeverin]

It seems like here we have the Republicans and Common sense centrists supporting a black and white enforcement of the rules, while Democrats supporting voter ignorance and the belittling of the rules. Gabu's ballot said edited votes will not be counted. There is no controversy other than Nym, Harry, and fritz supporting a challenge of the outcome.

Woah there... black and white... extreme cohesion to authority... you're freakin' me out, the more you talk like this the more sympathetic I get to the Dem cause