Lawsuit

[Sam Spade]

I agree with Brother bullmoose88 on the questioning of the plaintiff by a non-party.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Just a word in before respondent replies, if what I read is correct, I believe you have asserted two claims, the main claim re: Marokai Blue and a claim in the alternative re:Gustaf.  Is that correct?  If so, I dont think you need to amend/edit your brief, but you clarifying here would be helpful.

     I am arguing against treating their votes differently. So yes, I am basically asking to either count Gustaf's vote or invalidate Marokai's.

     Also, I PM'd the Supreme Court & the Attorney General about this matter, but I would also like to publically state that I intend to call Senator Franzl as a witness.

What is your argument that the Court should hear this challenge to Gustaf's vote, given the fact that it is not in the complaint?

On the Franzl witness thing, since this is an appeal, I am inclined to not allow the calling of witnesses.  Inclusion of an affidavit from Franzl attached to the brief would be allowed.

I would like to hear Brother Bullmoose88's thoughts on this.

     I believe that Gustaf's situation has very strong parallels to that of Marokai's. I would like to point out that while the letter of the law says that Marokai's vote should be invalid, the spirit of the law would disagree with that. However, the same applies to Gustaf, who cast nearly identical votes a minute apart from each other. With that in mind, it would only be fair for the SoFA to either count both of their votes or invalidate both of their votes.

[Sam Spade]

I would like to point out that while the letter of the law says that Marokai's vote should be invalid, the spirit of the law would disagree with that.

That is your opinion, Petitioner.  We have not found anything to that effect.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But Gustaf's votes were cast both in the absentee booth, and it appears uncontested that this vote actually did appear, whereas Marokai's vote does not appear, on its face, in the absentee voting booth (we can argue whether the vote in his post record is a vote in the booth, but that is an issue in front) and his second vote was not in the absentee voting booth, but rather in the normal voting booth.

So, on its face, there appears to be a much wider gulf between comparing the two votes than your brief states.

[Franzl]

Your honor, should I simply post a statement in this thread now? I would like to provide my view of the circumstances surrounding Gustaf's vote.

[afleitch]

If it pleases the Court I would like to further clarify my brief. The Court is fully entitled to dismiss this clarification however if I may refer in brief to the issue of Gustaf's vote as I did not assume that the plaintiff wished to address any aspect of this.

There is a want of a 'trail' behind this however IIRC the forum only allows someone to post 20 seconds after a previous post. I would imagine that was the same for Gustaf. It is small delay, but a delay none the less. The only way to get passed the error message is to refresh or hit 'back' on the browser. Furthermore, had he hit 'back' to resubmit then a red warning would have come up stating that a previous poster has posted (even if it is yourself) and therefore that his first post had been successful.

It was my understanding that the Court had been asked to determine whether the SoFA was correct to count Marokai's vote. Marokai did not delete his post, nor did he edit or tamper with it in any way; his original post did not appear as a vote (i.e appearing within the Absentee voting thread) and when the SoFA counted the votes cast, there was only one vote cast by Marokai to be found in any of the booths. That is what the SoFA counted. Had Marokai posted twice and both votes were visible to the SoFA and to all others reviewing the ballot threads, then naturally I would argue for it to be invalid. That was not the case.

That is all I have to contribute unless called to do so.

[Sam Spade]

Your honor, should I simply post a statement in this thread now? I would like to provide my view of the circumstances surrounding Gustaf's vote.

I am ok with that, but I would like to get bullmoose's ok too.

[Sam Spade]

The clarification is accepted, afleitch.

[Franzl]

Your honor, should I simply post a statement in this thread now? I would like to provide my view of the circumstances surrounding Gustaf's vote.

I am ok with that, but I would like to get bullmoose's ok too.

Alright...but it'll have to wait until tomorrow morning...it's getting too late over here and I'm going to bed

Hope that doesn't cause any problems.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I would like to point out that while the letter of the law says that Marokai's vote should be invalid, the spirit of the law would disagree with that.

That is your opinion, Petitioner.  We have not found anything to that effect.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But Gustaf's votes were cast both in the absentee booth, and it appears uncontested that this vote actually did appear, whereas Marokai's vote does not appear, on its face, in the absentee voting booth (we can argue whether the vote in his post record is a vote in the booth, but that is an issue in front) and his second vote was not in the absentee voting booth, but rather in the normal voting booth.

So, on its face, there appears to be a much wider gulf between comparing the two votes than your brief states.

     They both voted twice due to factors beyond their control, however. Gustaf did so because he had received an error message that led him to believe the first post wasn't counted. Marokai Blue did so because his first vote had disappeared. Despite this fact, Marokai's first vote was made plainly visible to the SoFA prior to his voting again, as I said earlier.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Forgive the interruption (and you won't ) but there is no proof of technical error other than Gustaf's word here. My vote was not visible in the thread, and if I hadn't voted a second time, someone would've been here challenging my vote on the basis it was not visible and therefore uncountable.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Forgive the interruption (and you won't ) but there is no proof of technical error other than Gustaf's word here. My vote was not visible in the thread, and if I hadn't voted a second time, someone would've been here challenging my vote on the basis it was not visible and therefore uncountable.

     The nature of his double vote would seem to back up his story that it occurred due to circumstances beyond his control. Furthermore, he is not someone known for dishonesty. It seems to me that there is little reason to doubt the veracity of his story on its own merits (which you do not touch on).

     Furthermore, I doubt that anybody would have challenged your vote if you had not posted it again, as you had presented clear proof of it having been cast in full compliance with the law, which the Secretary of Forum Affairs clearly saw. Or did you forget that you had posted a screencap of it?

It seems like I have fallen victim to the vote-eating booth. My vote for Lief & Max disappeared from the Absentee booth. You can still see it if you view my posts from my profile:



https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?action=profile;u=2249;sa=showPosts;start=105

[Associate Justice PiT]

I would like to point out that while the letter of the law says that Marokai's vote should be invalid, the spirit of the law would disagree with that.

That is your opinion, Petitioner.  We have not found anything to that effect.

     I did not notice this earlier, but I would like to say that I am well aware that that is my opinion. I cover why I believe it to be the case in the argument section of the brief.

[Sam Spade]

Does the SoFA or the AG wish to present a brief in defense of this case?

My next order is quite important and will be noticed to ALL parties.

[Sam Spade]

COURT ORDER

First:

From the respondent in this case (either the SoFA or the AG)

The court mandates submission of the following evidence:

1) All posts on this forum that concern the votes of Gustaf, Bacon King, Andy Jackson or Marokai Blue or any aliases made by the posters SoFA EarlAW, Gustaf, Bacon King, Andy Jackson or Marokai Blue or any aliases.

2) All correspondence between SoFA EarlAW and Gustaf, Bacon King, Andy Jackson or Marokai Blue or any aliases.

The respondent shall submit this evidence within 48 hours from receipt of notice or face contempt of court.
Second:

The court issues a temporary injunction prohibiting SoFA EarlAW from certifying the final election results concerning the election of President and Vice-President only.  The court also issues a temporary injunction prohibiting Lief from taking the oath of office as President and Bacon King from taking the oath of office as Vice President.

We will attempt to finish this matter as soon as possible so as to not prohibit the functioning of our government more than necessary.

So ordered.

Chief Justice bullmoose88
Justice Sam Spade

[Hatman 🍁]

Do you want me to post their votes, or just threads about their posts?

Anyways, I would invite the court to begin reading this thread around here:

What about Gustaf voting twice?  Course he could fix that by deleting one of them...

Yeah I'm not quite sure how to call that one....

Twice within the twenty minutes during which he'd've been allowed to edit, too.

Essentially the same vote too. I'd just count it once.

There are a lot of posts regarding this following that. Far too many to post here, and I think it would save the court a lot of time to just go through that thread.

Also, Mr. Jackson sent me this message via PM:

Don't know if your the right person to ask this but did I vote wrong in the June Absentee ballot in the Atlasia Presidential Election? I ask this because Happy Warrior PMed me and said that my vote was deleted, I went and checked it out and it's gone. Could you answer this, please?

To which I replied he could. I don't have a record of that, perhaps he could provide that.

I also received a couple of PMs about Gustaf's vote. I'm going to censor the posters though to protect their identity. I can prove you with their names in private, if the court wishes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[MasterJedi]

Question: Does the court see a decision taking place by July 6? Since the PPT would become President and I want to be PPT but not lose my Senate seat to become President for a few days this is all very important.

[Sam Spade]

EarlAW:

The thread will work.  I'm just going to post the relevant posts on this thread.

Are there any other threads of relevance?

PMs to and from you and Andy Jackson, Bacon King, Gustaf and Marokai Blue are all we really care about.  The PM's from other people are irrelevant to our examination.

[Sam Spade]

Up to Page 13 (I may have missed a post).  More later.

All persons who have had their votes mysteriously vanish will be allowed to re-post their votes.

Bacon King's vote is there, did he re-vote, or did it magically re-appear again?

Weird.

And why did Gustaf vote twice? His vote(s) won't count.

Well, voting twice is against the law.

Does it matter? He still voted twice.

Edit: I mean, yeah, I guess finding out why he did it would be nice, but is vote is still invalid regardless, the law being the law.

I think there's no way to prove that and he voted less than a minute apart. Myself and others noticed this pretty much as soon as he voted so we would be taking a huge leap of faith to assume that. We'd basically only have his word, as opposed to witness accounts of the others.

This is confusing; I had just assumed the first post didn't submit or something.

I'm going to try to deal with this the best way I can.

I told Mr. Jackson that he could post another vote, and it would count based on the circumstances. Based on this, I will not disallow his second vote. I'm sure given this extraordinary circumstance, such a move would be deemed legal. As for Gustaf, I cannot in good faith count it. Both votes are slightly different in terms of how many preferences he gave, and while extremely unlikely, could theoretically affect the outcome of the election.

I suppose. If his claims are consistent with what has been going on, then an inquiry could be held, however, he could easily make a fraudulent claim. I would give Gustaf the benefit of the doubt though, he doesn't seem to be a dishonest person.

Hi all.

I am on a train trip around Europe and am currently in Budapest. I did not have much time writing  my vote being on an internet cafe with little time. After making my first post I got an error message saying I had got timed out. My post seemed gone so I hurriedly made a new one with the same content. I did not see my first post, but I was in a hurry so it could have been a mistake.

I recieved a PM sazing I should delete one of the posts in order to have it count so I deleted the second one which was more of a patch-work. I hope my vote will count since my intent was clear and the mistake was innocent and due to technical problems.

Well, that seems reasonable, I suppose. I suggest unless anyone has any objections, that I will allow Gustaf's vote to stand.

Someone has objected, so I will make a decision on this at some point. I'll need some time. Feel free to debate the issue here, I would like to hear people's opinions.

Oy, I feel no matter what my decision, someone will be unhappy. Those who are opposed to Gustaf's vote however, are noticeably absent from this discussion. I, understand though.

For what it's worth, I support Gustaf's vote counting.

It seems like I have fallen victim to the vote-eating booth. My vote for Lief & Max disappeared from the Absentee booth. You can still see it if you view my posts from my profile:



https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?action=profile;u=2249;sa=showPosts;start=105

Marokai, you will be permitted to vote again.

And, yes, Conor's vote wont count. That means Senator PiT has won the state of Maine. Meanwhile, he also picks up the state of Michigan with all precincts reporting.

[Vepres]

Question: Does the court see a decision taking place by July 6? Since the PPT would become President and I want to be PPT but not lose my Senate seat to become President for a few days this is all very important.

Could the Senate just refrain from doing anything in this scenario until a decision is made by the courts?

[MasterJedi]

Question: Does the court see a decision taking place by July 6? Since the PPT would become President and I want to be PPT but not lose my Senate seat to become President for a few days this is all very important.

Could the Senate just refrain from doing anything in this scenario until a decision is made by the courts?

No PPT, means no Prez, which means no VP or PPT to run the Senate. Meaning nothing at all happens.

[Lief 🗽]

I'm fairly certain that you would only become acting President if you are re-elected PPT, but the PPT election won't happen immediately. Until a new PPT is elected (or you are re-elected), it is my understanding that the Dean of the Senate, Bacon King, is to become acting President once bgwah leaves office tomorrow.

I may be completely wrong though (and sorry to the justices for being off topic in the court room).

[bgwah]

I wouldn't mind serving for an extra day or two if the Supreme Court says so.

[afleitch]

IIRC, posting PM's are against forum rules regardless of what a fantasyland court says.

[Franzl]

I'm fairly certain that you would only become acting President if you are re-elected PPT, but the PPT election won't happen immediately. Until a new PPT is elected (or you are re-elected), it is my understanding that the Dean of the Senate, Bacon King, is to become acting President once bgwah leaves office tomorrow.

I may be completely wrong though (and sorry to the justices for being off topic in the court room).

That's my understanding as well.

[Hatman 🍁]

IIRC, posting PM's are against forum rules regardless of what a fantasyland court says.

Names have been removed.