September 2011 Election Results

The Voting Booth

The Voting Booth

TNPer
-
Here are the results of the September 2011 The North Pacific General Election

# of Ballots Legitimately Submitted:
10

Delegate:
Grosseschnauzer: 5
Felasia: 4
Abstain: 1

Pasargad withdrew from the race for Vice Delegate so there was no official candidate for Vice Delegate for the ballot

Speaker of the Regional Assembly:
A mean old man: 9
Abstain: 1

Congratulations to Grosseschnauzer as the new Delegate of The North Pacific and A mean old man as the new Speaker of The North Pacific Regional Assembly!

Thanks to all who voted.

Couple things to keep in mind for future:
1. A new Vice Delegate will need to be elected.
2. Legally, the Election Commission is NOT required to publish a list of eligible voters and eligible people to run for positions. A change in the law would be needed to require such a list to be published.

Once again, I do apologise for the delays and I thank you all for your patience and time.
 
I would like to request that the Election Commissioner to disclose the following information on whether who have voted in this election and in which time was the vote conducted. I'm requesting these information in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act.

http://s13.zetaboards.com/TNP/topic/633858/1/#new

To put it simply, you have not install any confidence in your ability to act as EC during the past few weeks. You also take a lot of time over the counting of votes period. I'm simply requesting these information to ensure that the no irregularities occur during the process. Although, I believe it already have as evidence from the voting times being extended and campaigning period being ignored.

In the mean time though, this region needs a government. Gross will have no objection from me if he is to assumed the Delegate position both on NS and on this forum immediately.
 
I have stayed out of the election controversy simply because I was the incumbent Vice Delegate running for Delegate (and because I hold root Admin status,) and wanted not to appear to pushing my candidacy. If anyone was doing anything they should not have been, it was without my knowledge, encouragement, or participation, and I have no reason at this time to believe that anyone was attempting to influence the voting.

In the past, voters who sent a PM to the Voting Booth to cast their vote, would state in the voting thread that they had voted by PM. I observe that wasn't done this time. I usually do vote that way, but because of the controversy, I posted my vote publicly to avoid any appearance of irregularity.

I will note that I could access the Voting Booth account in order to try and audit the PMs during the election, but there is no guarantee that all PMs would remain; I'm not accusing anyone of anything, just observing that checking that account would not have certainty about it.

I'm posting my oath in a moment; and I'm asking Blackshear to take steps to help with the transition process, especially in the WFE. Likewise those who have the means to check such things can help me by providing the latest information of total endos received and given by WA members in TNP. I'll likely ask one of the Security Council members to raise their endo count and act as an interim Vice Delegate, and when I have that information, I will initiate the process for a special election for a Vice Delegate under Law 26.

I want to thank those who voted for me or for Felasia or who abstained. This was a lower than usual turnout, but I think there are ways we can do better. Again, thank you all for electing me as the next Delegate of The North Pacific.
 
Felasia:
I would like to request that the Election Commissioner to disclose the following information on whether who have voted in this election and in which time was the vote conducted. I'm requesting these information in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act.

http://s13.zetaboards.com/TNP/topic/633858/1/#new

To put it simply, you have not install any confidence in your ability to act as EC during the past few weeks. You also take a lot of time over the counting of votes period. I'm simply requesting these information to ensure that the no irregularities occur during the process. Although, I believe it already have as evidence from the voting times being extended and campaigning period being ignored.

In the mean time though, this region needs a government. Gross will have no objection from me if he is to assumed the Delegate position both on NS and on this forum immediately.
Click to expand...
Felasia, you are one to talk, given how you have taken a lot of time when you were Speaker and Election Commissioner in posting results as well, but people were for the most part, patient with you, because you were busy IRL.

Likewise, I was busy IRL and I had computer problems which only gave me limited access to the forum, much less to the Internet, so please pay me the same courtesy and respect as you had wanted during your tenure. Thank you.
 
As some of the votes were by PM, I would need explicit permisison from either the Delegate, and/or the voters who PMed me their ballots to publish their names, in order to ensure that their privacy was not being violated by complying with your request, Felasia.
 
This is ridiculous. No vote in TNP history has been entirely invalidated for voting for an unlisted choice: those have always been counted as Abstentions.

In every TNP election I have ever seen, the Election Commissioner has stated who voted, including those who voted by PM (without stating their votes), in order to permit verification by any party that they were in fact eligible voters.
 
You will also notice that I have made no post from the last date on the 22 before the Special Judicial Election until it is the 26 which is the date that the result is post.

On the other hand, I and Eluvatar see you on the forum after the election is over so pardon me for questioning your excuse. You even have time to post asking for more time when in the same amount of time it take to post, it should have been able to count the votes.

Also, the list of voters is a public knowledge. I'm not asking to see who they voted for just that who actually vote. It's not a violation of their right or privacy.
 
Felasia:
You will also notice that I have made no post from the last date on the 22 before the Special Judicial Election until it is the 26 which is the date that the result is post.

On the other hand, I and Eluvatar see you on the forum after the election is over so pardon me for questioning your excuse. You even have time to post asking for more time when in the same amount of time it take to post, it should have been able to count the votes.

Also, the list of voters is a public knowledge. I'm not asking to see who they voted for just that who actually vote. It's not a violation of their right or privacy.
Click to expand...
Just because I have the page on a tab in Firefox open doesn't mean I am always on that tab. My computer has been acting really slow and when I mean I had limited access it was because my computer was either crashing on the browser very frequently or something else was taking up a lot of my 2 gigs of RAM.

A vote for an illegitmate candidate is essentially like voting improperly on your ballot IRL, and your ballot gets thrown out. If BW actually cared about the election process and wanted to vote, he would have taken it seriously and followed the ballot instructions. It's not rocket science mate.

ANd if you say it's public knowledge Felasia, then fair enough. I just wanted to be sure I wasn't violating anyone's privacy.
 
The following people have voted either by posting on the voting thread, or via PM:

Felasia
unibot
Greater Peterstan
Grosseschnauzer
Cakatoa
Vilnoia1
Dalimbar
Blasphemy Doom
Pasargad
A mean old man
 
I would like to note an inconsistent in the vote.

Firstly, I would like to direct you to your post here. http://s13.zetaboards.com/TNP/single/?p=8037548&t=6827473

And I quote:

BW's vote is thrown out due to the fact that he voted deliberately for an ineligible candidate.
Click to expand...

So his vote here was considered illegal because the candidate is ineligible: http://s13.zetaboards.com/TNP/single/?p=8037397&t=6827473

JAL for Delegate, AMOM for Speaker.
Click to expand...

On the other hand, we have Gross vote: http://s13.zetaboards.com/TNP/single/?p=8037303&t=6827473

And I quote:

As far as I can tell, this is the voting thread, so.....

Delegate:
Grosseschnauzer

Vice Delegate:
Pasargad


Regional Assembly Speaker:
A Mean Old Man
Click to expand...

An ineligible candidate.

And from your list above:

The following people have voted either by posting on the voting thread, or via PM:

Felasia
unibot
Greater Peterstan
Grosseschnauzer
Cakatoa
Vilnoia1
Dalimbar
Blasphemy Doom
Pasargad
A mean old man
Click to expand...

Inconsistency. You have accepted Gross vote, but not BW.

I will be pressing charges against your action.
 
It was later clarified that it's up the EC's discretion of whether or not I can accept a write-in vote, and I didn't, but that didn't invalidate the rest of his ballot.

BW's ballot was thrown out because he deliberately admitted to trolling by voting for an illegitimate candidate.

Pasargad was initially on the ballot but then he withdrew. Given the fact that he withdrew after voting started, I allowed people to vote for the other positions and only discounted the Vice-Delegate vote due to the late withdrawal.

It makes perfect logical sense to adapt, Felasia.
 
You choose which write-in vote to accept. That is inconsistency. You invalidate BW's ballot since you said that there is only 10 votes for Speaker.

Gross did admitted to voting for illegitimate candidate here: http://s13.zetaboards.com/TNP/single/?p=8037316&t=6827473

Pasargad withdraw before Gross vote as you noted yourself in that thread, you also noted that the election for Vice Delegate have no candidate, but didn't declared it over. (http://s13.zetaboards.com/TNP/single/?p=8037296&t=6827473) He have no legitimate reason to continue with the vote and as such should be treat in the same way as BW vote did.

It make no sense.
 
Yes, but do you take into account that if he also discount Gross vote then we have a tie?

I don't want to sound like a sore loser, but this is a weird decision by EC and I want to know why he do it.
 
Except that under some interpretations of TNP tradition, it would cause the election to have a runoff vote. Yes, they are strange traditions.
 
There is also the question of the validity of Pasargad's vote. I do not know which way he voted, but I intentionally did not attempt to vote after having been inactive for a period exceeding 15 days and then failed to reapply to the RA before the elections began.
 
An invalidated vote on a ballot should still be counted and reported as an invalidate vote. In our system here, invalidated votes no longer count in determining the results of a race. Blue Wolf should have been shown as have appeared to vote, but that his vote for Delegate was invalidated since the candidate he voted for was not a qualified candidate.

I've applied the principle that is stated in print versions of Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised, the original edition of which was published in the 1800s, and is based on the procedures originally written by Thomas Jefferson (known as Jefferson's Manual in the RL U.S. House of Representatives.) Is it the only way to deal with invalid votes? No, it isn't, but it is a reasonable way to do so.

And as to my vote for Vice Delegate, at the time I posted my vote, the official ballot in the first vote still listed that office and that candidate, and I was more concerned about voting in time, and followed the official ballot and instructions; it wasn't certain that Pasargad would or wouldn't be disqualified at the end of the elections (as the possibility of a court procedure still existed at the time.)
 
Grosseschnauzer:
An invalidated vote on a ballot should still be counted and reported as an invalidate vote. In our system here, invalidated votes no longer count in determining the results of a race. Blue Wolf should have been shown as have appeared to vote, but that his vote for Delegate was invalidated since the candidate he voted for was not a qualified candidate.

I've applied the principle that is stated in print versions of Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised, the original edition of which was published in the 1800s, and is based on the procedures originally written by Thomas Jefferson (known as Jefferson's Manual in the RL U.S. House of Representatives.) Is it the only way to deal with invalid votes? No, it isn't, but it is a reasonable way to do so.

And as to my vote for Vice Delegate, at the time I posted my vote, the official ballot in the first vote still listed that office and that candidate, and I was more concerned about voting in time, and followed the official ballot and instructions; it wasn't certain that Pasargad would or wouldn't be disqualified at the end of the elections (as the possibility of a court procedure still existed at the time.)
Click to expand...
Exactly, and with the fact that Pasargad withdrew, the rest of his vote was still a valid ballot, and his vote was legitimate.

If he went and voted for say, my cat Bacon for Delegate, it would have been thrown out.
 
Eluvatar:
In every TNP election I have ever seen, the Election Commissioner has stated who voted, including those who voted by PM (without stating their votes), in order to permit verification by any party that they were in fact eligible voters.
Click to expand...
Bullshit. That was not the case in any of the elections I've been part of the last year. Check the threads.

The rest of the arguments are specious at best. Either way, I certify these results as official.

Congratulations to the winners and to the losers, better luck next time.
 
Blackshear:
Eluvatar:
In every TNP election I have ever seen, the Election Commissioner has stated who voted, including those who voted by PM (without stating their votes), in order to permit verification by any party that they were in fact eligible voters.
Click to expand...
Bullshit. That was not the case in any of the elections I've been part of the last year. Check the threads.

The rest of the arguments are specious at best. Either way, I certify these results as official.

Congratulations to the winners and to the losers, better luck next time.
Click to expand...
Perhaps things have changed. But that's certainly how I remember it happening throughout 2006, 2007, and 2008.
 
The rule was that if you voted by PM, you were directed to post a statement in the voting thread that you had in fact voted by PM. I believe it is in Law 26 in its current form. A lot of controversy could have been avoided had everyone followed the statutory procedure.
 
An invalidated vote on a ballot should still be counted and reported as an invalidate vote. In our system here, invalidated votes no longer count in determining the results of a race. Blue Wolf should have been shown as have appeared to vote, but that his vote for Delegate was invalidated since the candidate he voted for was not a qualified candidate.

I've applied the principle that is stated in print versions of Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised, the original edition of which was published in the 1800s, and is based on the procedures originally written by Thomas Jefferson (known as Jefferson's Manual in the RL U.S. House of Representatives.) Is it the only way to deal with invalid votes? No, it isn't, but it is a reasonable way to do so.

And as to my vote for Vice Delegate, at the time I posted my vote, the official ballot in the first vote still listed that office and that candidate, and I was more concerned about voting in time, and followed the official ballot and instructions; it wasn't certain that Pasargad would or wouldn't be disqualified at the end of the elections (as the possibility of a court procedure still existed at the time.)
Click to expand...

The fact is that Pasargad withdraw before your vote and the EC said that himself.

I would like to quote an announcement made by the Voting Booth on this issue on the General Election thread when Pasargad resign as candidate. This is made about 4-5 hours before your post. http://s13.zetaboards.com/TNP/single/?p=8037296&t=6827473

A change in the ballot: Pasargad has resigned from the race, so there is no candidate for Vice Delegate of The North Pacific.

If it is also ok with Blackshear and others, I can extend the voting deadline to the 24th instead of the 21st.
Click to expand...

Afterward, when informed by AMOM that you can't vote for Pasargad as he is no longer a candidate for the position. You acknowledge the fact, but made no attempt to change the vote.

http://s13.zetaboards.com/TNP/topic/6827473/2/

Consider it a write-in then, since no other names are on the ballot.
Click to expand...

Since the election law does not recognize write-in votes, and never has, you may interpret the vote any way you wish.
Click to expand...

Looking back to the event of BW, the similarity of this event is undeniable, yet the Election Commissioner treat both events in a very different way and in a way that I believe that his personal opinion on Blue Wolf may have an effect on the decision.

Which also reminds me, I would like to know if there is a problem with the voting booth account that prevent an edit of post or not. It is something that we should fix before judicial election.
 
Actually, my choice of delegate candidates was based entirely on what Grosse had said previous to my posting and was made in jest of his words. Oddly enough, I'm the only one with my entire vote invalidated.

Furthermore, I find it odd that the Election Commissioner didn't attempt to either contact nor correct me of any error I may have made prior to throwing away my vote. If it was really such a problem, you'd think he would have PMed me in an attempt to fix it. Sadly, this never occurred.
 
Looking back to the event of BW, the similarity of this event is undeniable, yet the Election Commissioner treat both events in a very different way and in a way that I believe that his personal opinion on Blue Wolf may have an effect on the decision.
Click to expand...

They weren't similar. BW's was a simultaneous attempt to troll and deliberately put in an invalid vote. It was pointed out by AMOM and he didn't deny it.

Which also reminds me, I would like to know if there is a problem with the voting booth account that prevent an edit of post or not. It is something that we should fix before judicial election.
Click to expand...

Well apparently TVB account can only edit the topic title for a thread he starts, and not his own posts.

Furthermore, I find it odd that the Election Commissioner didn't attempt to either contact nor correct me of any error I may have made prior to throwing away my vote. If it was really such a problem, you'd think he would have PMed me in an attempt to fix it. Sadly, this never occurred.
Click to expand...

IRL if you vote wrongly your vote names in that aren't on a ballot, and write-in candidates are not allowed, your vote is thrown out. I have no obligation to anyone to inform them if they voted incorrectly or not. It is up to the voter to check their own ballot.

Point is, the election was certified as official, people need to stop being sore losers. I've lost elections multiple times, you don't ever see me whining about it. It's called humility.

Apologies for the bluntness but Felasia had a few issues as EC in his time and no one threw Law 26 complaints against him.
 
They weren't similar. BW's was a simultaneous attempt to troll and deliberately put in an invalid vote. It was pointed out by AMOM and he didn't deny it.
Click to expand...

10. Each Nation entitled to a vote in any manner under the fundamental laws of the region is entitled to the equal treatment and protection of that Nation's right to vote.
Click to expand...

Regardless, you do not have the authority to violate his right to vote in accordance with the bill of right. Only his Delegate vote should be thrown out in this case, not everything. On the other hand, we have Gross's vote who regardless of intention did act in the same manner as Blue Wolf which is to vote for a "write-in" candidate. In this instant, you invalidate his Write-In's vote, but not the other vote.

It's an inconsistency. One that must be address.

Well apparently TVB account can only edit the topic title for a thread he starts, and not his own posts.
Click to expand...

I believe Eluvatar is currently looking into the problem.

IRL if you vote wrongly your vote names in that aren't on a ballot, and write-in candidates are not allowed, your vote is thrown out. I have no obligation to anyone to inform them if they voted incorrectly or not. It is up to the voter to check their own ballot.

Point is, the election was certified as official, people need to stop being sore losers. I've lost elections multiple times, you don't ever see me whining about it. It's called humility.

Apologies for the bluntness but Felasia had a few issues as EC in his time and no one threw Law 26 complaints against him.
Click to expand...

I never go ahead with election when inconsistency exist such as when I overlook Elu's date of membership in the RA on Judicial Election. I invalidate the election and hold a new one. Although, I don't see you complaining at the time when you were elected on the election I oversee.

Election being certified as official by the previous Delegate and the EC doesn't means that it can't be overturned by Justice when Election Commissioner's action is questionable and when inconsistency exist.
 
Regardless, you do not have the authority to violate his right to vote in accordance with the bill of right. Only his Delegate vote should be thrown out in this case, not everything. On the other hand, we have Gross's vote who regardless of intention did act in the same manner as Blue Wolf which is to vote for a "write-in" candidate. In this instant, you invalidate his Write-In's vote, but not the other vote.

It's an inconsistency. One that must be address.
Click to expand...

There isn't any inconsistency that must be *addressed*.

The bill of rights does not give him the right to troll in an official voting thread. Grosse's vote was legitimate and I had the option to recognise write in votes or not, which I didn't, and since Pasargad legally withdrew DURING voting, whether or not it happened before Grosse voted was irrelevant. It happeend during voting, and so the ballot was altered to reflect that, and as a result, since the other two portions of the ballot he submitted were valid, there were no irregularities.

When you submit a voting ballot, it either gets accepted completely, or not at all. I have not heard of an election where someone's ballot was partially accepted. If you screw up on on section of the ballot, the whole thing is invalidated. Simple as that.
 
I will wait for the court to decide.

You don't have the right to invalidate the vote even if it's actually trolling, but I think BW vote is more of an expression of dissatisfaction with the current candidates which is his right to express then trolling. BW have every right as describe by the bill of right to vote as he wish.

The bill of rights does not give him the right to troll in an official voting thread. Grosse's vote was legitimate and I had the option to recognise write in votes or not, which I didn't, and since Pasargad legally withdrew DURING voting, whether or not it happened before Grosse voted was irrelevant. It happeend during voting, and so the ballot was altered to reflect that, and as a result, since the other two portions of the ballot he submitted were valid, there were no irregularities.

When you submit a voting ballot, it either gets accepted completely, or not at all. I have not heard of an election where someone's ballot was partially accepted. If you screw up on on section of the ballot, the whole thing is invalidated. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

Yet Gross vote which is conducted after you have declared no candidate for Vice Delegate position is accepted in full. Your declaration indicates a change in ballot, one that was ignored. Instead of using the same standard you use against BW, you decided to accept the vote.

:headbang:
 
Govindia:
IRL if you vote wrongly your vote names in that aren't on a ballot, and write-in candidates are not allowed, your vote is thrown out.
Click to expand...
That's absolutely incorrect. At least in 'merkia, using your RL "example", if I were to write in a vote for Mr. T as president and filled out the rest of my ballot for state and local candidates using only the choices give to me, only my vote for Mr. T would be considered null, the rest of my ballot would be accepted. They wouldn't just look at my ballot, see "Mr. T" for President and declare "well that's just stupid" as they ball up my ballot and throw it in the trash.

That would be considered election fraud.
 
Felasia:
I will wait for the court to decide.

You don't have the right to invalidate the vote even if it's actually trolling, but I think BW vote is more of an expression of dissatisfaction with the current candidates which is his right to express then trolling. BW have every right as describe by the bill of right to vote as he wish.

The bill of rights does not give him the right to troll in an official voting thread. Grosse's vote was legitimate and I had the option to recognise write in votes or not, which I didn't, and since Pasargad legally withdrew DURING voting, whether or not it happened before Grosse voted was irrelevant. It happeend during voting, and so the ballot was altered to reflect that, and as a result, since the other two portions of the ballot he submitted were valid, there were no irregularities.

When you submit a voting ballot, it either gets accepted completely, or not at all. I have not heard of an election where someone's ballot was partially accepted. If you screw up on on section of the ballot, the whole thing is invalidated. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

Yet Gross vote which is conducted after you have declared no candidate for Vice Delegate position is accepted in full. Your declaration indicates a change in ballot, one that was ignored. Instead of using the same standard you use against BW, you decided to accept the vote.

:headbang:
Click to expand...
The Bill of Rights doesn't say, as far as I know that he can vote for invalid candidates.

Grosse's ballot wasn't partially done. When the official ballot was amended, he still had his relevant candidates in there and didn't bother removing it. He still submitted a valid ballot.

And BW, please show a little civility yea? >_> Here write in candidates were not allowed, and again, there is no instance in TNP electoral history that a partial ballot was accepted. Grosse's was NOT a partial ballot. It was complete, and valid.

Stop being a sore loser Felasia. Be a man, be humble and accept the fact you lost fair and square. Flemingovia's signature accurately describes this situation.
 
Gov, just count his vote and end the conflict. It's not like his vote would change the election results; the write-in can be discarded and I can win with ten votes instead of nine. It's not a big deal.
 
The Bill of Rights doesn't say, as far as I know that he can vote for invalid candidates.

Grosse's ballot wasn't partially done. When the official ballot was amended, he still had his relevant candidates in there and didn't bother removing it. He still submitted a valid ballot.

And BW, please show a little civility yea? >_> Here write in candidates were not allowed, and again, there is no instance in TNP electoral history that a partial ballot was accepted. Grosse's was NOT a partial ballot. It was complete, and valid.

Stop being a sore loser Felasia. Be a man, be humble and accept the fact you lost fair and square. Flemingovia's signature accurately describes this situation.
Click to expand...

The Bill of Rights indicate he is allow to vote in anyway he wishes and that his right to vote is protected. I think anyway he wishes would include and invalid candidate.

Once again, I would like to quote you and Gross in the voting thread.

The Voting Booth post made on Sep 20 2011, 06:28 PM

Gross's post made on Sep 20 2011, 09:51 PM

Notice the time different? Afterward, there is also an attempt to notify him of the change of ballot, but he choose to proceed. Yet when BW does the same, you invalidate his entier ballot.

And yes, I'm a sore loser. Seriously, I have been calling non-stop for a re-election and by adding BW's vote to the result... I will be a winner! (That's sarcasm if your brain can't catch it. Find me one post in which I want a new election.)
 
Felasia:
The Bill of Rights doesn't say, as far as I know that he can vote for invalid candidates.

Grosse's ballot wasn't partially done. When the official ballot was amended, he still had his relevant candidates in there and didn't bother removing it. He still submitted a valid ballot.

And BW, please show a little civility yea? >_> Here write in candidates were not allowed, and again, there is no instance in TNP electoral history that a partial ballot was accepted. Grosse's was NOT a partial ballot. It was complete, and valid.

Stop being a sore loser Felasia. Be a man, be humble and accept the fact you lost fair and square. Flemingovia's signature accurately describes this situation.
Click to expand...

The Bill of Rights indicate he is allow to vote in anyway he wishes and that his right to vote is protected. I think anyway he wishes would include and invalid candidate.

Once again, I would like to quote you and Gross in the voting thread.

The Voting Booth post made on Sep 20 2011, 06:28 PM

Gross's post made on Sep 20 2011, 09:51 PM

Notice the time different? Afterward, there is also an attempt to notify him of the change of ballot, but he choose to proceed. Yet when BW does the same, you invalidate his entier ballot.

And yes, I'm a sore loser. Seriously, I have been calling non-stop for a re-election and by adding BW's vote to the result... I will be a winner! (That's sarcasm if your brain can't catch it. Find me one post in which I want a new election.)
Click to expand...
If I count BW's vote as partial , will you drop your complaint to the Attorney General?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top