SENATE BILL: Repeal of the Legitimize the Voting Act (Law'd)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: NC Yankee
Product of the Government Oversight and Reform Committee - Scroll up for discussion

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Basically the legislation is impractical as written and it was determined by the GOR Committee in May to just abolish the position of Moderator General and repeal the whole law instead of trying to fix it.

There was a prior discussion of this topic back from when Nix was chairman of the committee as well.

I am ramming this through slot six, because I can and the administration's slots are plugged up right now. I hope nothing bad happens while we are here.

That said it is fairly straight forward and thus I am going for UC here. Senators have 24 hours to object to the suspension of the rules and proceeding directly to a final vote.

[MaxQue]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=168656.msg3813073#msg3813073

Nothing in law allows homely to throw out that vote, despite a mod having announced the banishment of the poster. So, we still need laws on the subject. The needs to be rewritten, not repealed and this need to be done before something like that has an effect on an election result and ends in lenghty court proceedings.

So, I object to the UC and an amendment should follow soon, to allow the SoFE to not count such votes without having to involve courts.

[Napoleon]

I was going to post that too, Max. This is becoming it's own problem (bmotley too).

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There is something weird going on there though. Typically a ban means dead. So there must be some kind of miscommunication. For the original account, I believe sock puppetry is a felony in the criminal statute and carries a year long voting ban once convicted. We have such a think as innocent until proven guilty.

Also the purpose of the bill in question to be repealed was not to catch socks, but to catch proxies and there is a technological problem with the way this bill is written. All votes from phones are illegal technically, all votes from AOL users might be as well including all of mine since April 2010. I was on AIM with MasterJedi the first night he scanned the voters for proxies as Moderator General under this law in question. It yielded nothing, no one was caught and I have no evidence of it being enforced at any point in the last year and a half and possibly longer even.

We examined it twice in the GOR Committee under Nix and again with myself, Nappy and I think X. No one could find a way to make this work and the committee voted unanimously for outright repeal.

[MaxQue]

There is something weird going on there though. Typically a ban means dead. So there must be some kind of miscommunication. For the original account, I believe sock puppetry is a felony in the criminal statute and carries a year long voting ban once convicted. We have such a think as innocent until proven guilty.

Also the purpose of the bill in question to be repealed was not to catch socks, but to catch proxies and there is a technological problem with the way this bill is written. All votes from phones are illegal technically, all votes from AOL users might be as well including all of mine since April 2010. I was on AIM with MasterJedi the first night he scanned the voters for proxies as Moderator General under this law in question. It yielded nothing, no one was caught and I have no evidence of it being enforced at any point in the last year and a half and possibly longer even.

We examined it twice in the GOR Committee under Nix and again with myself, Nappy and I think X. No one could find a way to make this work and the committee voted unanimously for outright repeal.

Oh, I fully stand with the bill as written, I'll just propose an amendment to add a third section, which will amend the CESRA to stop counting votes of posters which have been banned during a vote.

I want to repeal the "Legitimize the Voting Act" and abolish MG, yes.

[MaxQue]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This should not be considered as death. If the administration of this website decided to ban someone, they are a very good reason and such people votes shouldn't count.

See my first message for an example.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What about accidental IP bans:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=131386.0

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Witheld Pending Clarification
Status: Waiting for feedback.

[MaxQue]

What about accidental IP bans:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=131386.0

I doubt a moderator announced than a decision of banning you has been reached. Sure, that may need some clarification, but there was no banning announcement and you being banned was obviously an error. There was no conscious decision to ban you.

If you think than this is needed, sure than text can be clarified. I understand your issue, my host used dynamic IPs at a point (don't know if they do anymore).

[Хahar 🤔]

The ban on mobile voting is important and ought to be kept. Rather than just throwing the whole thing out and leaving nothing in its place, why not rewrite the legislation so that it makes sense?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What about accidental IP bans:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=131386.0

I doubt a moderator announced than a decision of banning you has been reached. Sure, that may need some clarification, but there was no banning announcement and you being banned was obviously an error. There was no conscious decision to ban you.

If you think than this is needed, sure than text can be clarified. I understand your issue, my host used dynamic IPs at a point (don't know if they do anymore).

It depends on the construction but the first half may not be conditional on mod announcement, just the "future bans" after the word "nor". We cannot exclude bans by Leip himself, though whether he still does that himself any more I don't know. He used to be the only one doing that until Nym got magic powers too. Also I don't think cast would end in "ed".

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If you find these changes satisfactory, I will just insert them into the previous amendment, rather than waste time having you offer another. Since 32 hasn't even been judged yet, more or less considered, that should be permissable rules wise.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Maybe we should say "administation or moderation team". I would think "administration of the site" would include all of them. But Leips official title is administrator and the last thing we want to do is make it exclusive to him either.

What do you think?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The ban on mobile voting is important and ought to be kept. Rather than just throwing the whole thing out and leaving nothing in its place, why not rewrite the legislation so that it makes sense?

Are there any Senators interested in going this route?

We did sort of have a problem but you also run into ensuring it is enforced, which this was not. Any ideas?

[MaxQue]

Maybe we should say "administation or moderation team". I would think "administration of the site" would include all of them. But Leips official title is administrator and the last thing we want to do is make it exclusive to him either.

What do you think?

I think it's much better wording, yes.

[bore]

Why would we ban voting from mobiles?

[Хahar 🤔]

Why would we ban voting from mobiles?

Mobile IPs are untraceable, which means that it's impossible to prove or disprove voter fraud.

[PJ]

Why would we ban voting from mobiles?

Mobile IPs are untraceable, which means that it's impossible to prove or disprove voter fraud.

Sometimes, voters can only access the forum from mobiles. This includes myself, on occasion, like when I am out of town.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Friendly
Status: Senators have 24 hours to object to the above amendment.

[bore]

Why would we ban voting from mobiles?

Mobile IPs are untraceable, which means that it's impossible to prove or disprove voter fraud.

Isn't it fairly easy to rig a computer IP so it's untraceable as well?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Why would we ban voting from mobiles?

Mobile IPs are untraceable, which means that it's impossible to prove or disprove voter fraud.

Isn't it fairly easy to rig a computer IP so it's untraceable as well?

You mean other than by a proxy?

[bore]

Why would we ban voting from mobiles?

Mobile IPs are untraceable, which means that it's impossible to prove or disprove voter fraud.

Isn't it fairly easy to rig a computer IP so it's untraceable as well?

You mean other than by a proxy?

There might be another way (I wouldn't know as I'm awful at technology), but in that post I meant a proxy.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

When the underlying bill was passed, it was at the height of a certain someone from California's power and we were certain that a large number of people in his party were socks of him or his close associates, hence why this bill was passed. Unfortunately, no one gave enough consideration to the technical side and thus we had problems of course. I didn't even know abotu AOL's situation until afterwards when Jedi was scanning the votes as the law requires and explained how it worked.

I think if we are to continue part of all of this it would have to be redone and with the input of people who understands Internet Protocols and such back and forth.

[Хahar 🤔]

Why would we ban voting from mobiles?

Mobile IPs are untraceable, which means that it's impossible to prove or disprove voter fraud.

Isn't it fairly easy to rig a computer IP so it's untraceable as well?

You mean other than by a proxy?

There might be another way (I wouldn't know as I'm awful at technology), but in that post I meant a proxy.

Proxy voting should also be disallowed, obviously.

[bore]

Why would we ban voting from mobiles?

Mobile IPs are untraceable, which means that it's impossible to prove or disprove voter fraud.

Isn't it fairly easy to rig a computer IP so it's untraceable as well?

You mean other than by a proxy?

There might be another way (I wouldn't know as I'm awful at technology), but in that post I meant a proxy.

Proxy voting should also be disallowed, obviously.

Can you prove a post is from a proxy?