Department of Federal Elections: Homelycooking, SoFE

[ZuWo]

Who is the second invalid vote?

LucysBeau/DemHawk (activity requirement)

I am continuously updating my preference chart: see the first page.

Thanks for the great and precise work you are doing!

[ZuWo]

Thank you, SoFE and RG, for handling this election in a great way.
Unfortunately the gap between Polnut/Tmthforu94 and ZuWo/Jbrase was a bit too big on the final count, and there was no way to rig the election without attracting attention. So please return the envelope I sent you on Thursday to my office. Thank you!

[ZuWo]

You mean Clarence/Yelnoc

Well, there could be a VP candidate called Jbrase on the ballot today had the Atlasian voters been wiser 4 months ago ...

[ZuWo]

Seatown is twice on your list of those who have voted (number 20 and 23).

[ZuWo]

Peeperkorn's vote is invalid because he doesn't meet activity requirements (i.e. he posted too rarely in the last 8 weeks).

[ZuWo]

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Consolidated_Electoral_System_Reform_Act#Section_14:_Federal_Activity_Requirements

Section 14

[ZuWo]

Then I see many votes that should be invalidated...

Really? I had a brief look at other votes and they all seemed valid to me. Granted, this was a brief look and not a very close one. (8 weeks prior to the election means that the time around late April is relevant).

[ZuWo]

Then I see many votes that should be invalidated...

Really? I had a brief look at other votes and they all seemed valid to me. Granted, this was a brief look and not a very close one. (8 weeks prior to the election means that the time around mid-April is relevant).

Lief, angus, MasterSanders, etc. just to name a few.  If this law is still actually in place and hasn't been updated recently, then official turnout is much lower than previously thought.

The law is still in place. For example, it has had a major impact on the last Senate at-large election as can be seen in this thread:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=152529.0

And none of the guys you mentioned does not meet these activity requirements; they all had way more than 25 posts during the 8 weeks prior to the commencement of this election (posts can be made anywhere on this forum, not only on the Atlasia subboards). On the other hand, Peeperkorn's case is pretty clear.

[ZuWo]

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Consolidated_Electoral_System_Reform_Act#Section_14:_Federal_Activity_Requirements

Section 14

This is the most recent bit of information on the federal activity requirements I know of. It could be that the wiki is outdated on this matter but I haven't seen that this has changed in the last months.

[ZuWo]

This overrides the previous:

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Federal_Activity_Requirements_Revision_Act

Okay, I did not have 25, but I did have 15 which appears to be the current law.  Homely, you made a mistake, please fix it.  My vote could possibly alter the result.

I don't think the link that you posted is more recent because the information in the link I posted goes back to 2009, to the Anti-Zombie Act of 2009, while the statute you mention is from 2006.
The link I provided says the following at the bottom of the wiki page:

"Section 14, Clause 1 of this Act was amendment by the Federal Activity Requirements Revision Act (December 23, 2006) to require only 15 edits. That act was repealed by the Anti-Zombie Act of 2009 (July 19, 2009), which restored the requirement for 25 edits."

Though if there is one thing we can agree on it's the fact that this has to be clarified as soon as possible and shouldn't cause so much confusion anymore in the next elections.

[ZuWo]

If someone who is aware of such a more recent statute could provide a link and clarify this mess once and for all that would be great.