A possible flaw in our election law

Besides the change from 7 to 5 days, why the change from:
9. The period for nominations or declarations of candidacy shall last for seven days.
Click to expand...
to
8. Regional Assembly members shall be provided five days to declare their candidacy.
Click to expand...
?

(I'm puzzled by the completely different wording).
 
I object to moving this to a vote when the latest revision covers much more than the original scope of the bill.

It's like having a Christmas Tree bill in the US Congress, when a bill for one limited object is expanded by amendments to a much broader set of objectives.

These may all be related to the election laws, but I think the membership of the RA should be able to consider this broader bill as if it were a new proposal, which, in effect, it is.
 
Grosse, that's the purpose of the two day waiting period between the end of formal debate and the beginning of voting - so that if amendments are accepted near the end of the formal debate period, RA members will have some time to look it over and familiarize themselves with the changes before voting begins. That being said, when this goes to vote, it will have been a full week since SillyString offered her amendment - how much time do you think the RA needs?
 
I think the broadness of the latest changes dictate resetting the clock to the pre-formal debate phase.
Making changes in election procedure is always fraught with unintended consequences, and that in and of itself dictates with caution.
And I don't know where others are but I'm in a part of the US that has has extreme winter weather this past week, and with my other involvements, I haven't had much time around here as a result. Not to mention that historically, December is all but a built-in slow period in NS and that has never changed in the decade since I first been involved in NS.
 
flemingovia:
The ALL YOUR ELECTION LAW ARE BELONG TO US bill
Click to expand...
Even if I disagreed with what the bill stands for, I would vote for it solely on the basis of this name.
 
Mr speaker, I believe the legal processes of tnp have been followed scrupulously. I would object to resetting the debate period.
 
flemingovia:
Mr speaker, I believe the legal processes of tnp have been followed scrupulously. I would object to resetting the debate period.
Click to expand...
From what I've seen, I'm inclined to agree with this assessment of things.
 
Grosseschnauzer:
Not to mention that historically, December is all but a built-in slow period in NS and that has never changed in the decade since I first been involved in NS.
Click to expand...
To allay the Assembly member's concerts, statistically December is not all that slow in TNP (except, understandably, for the few days around Christmas)

Here are the board posting statistics for the academic year beginning September 2012. You will see the December's post count is actually about mid-table in terms of activity.

August 2013 2,469 (lower)
July 2013 2,793 (lower)
June 2013 4,897
May 2013 3,172
April 2013 2,394 (lower)
March 2013 3,409
February 2013 2,428 (lower)
January 2013 3,630
December 2012 2,954
November 2012 5,737
October 2012 1,995 (lower)
September 2012 3,598

In short, I think the Regional Assembly can handle a legislative agenda in December.
 
In the interests of continuing improvement of our laws, I would be interested to know. Why those abstaining have done so, and why whites have been cast against this bill. Particularly if these are issues that have not come up in debate.
 
I am withholding my vote for now.

Why does this bill entirely remove the traditional pause between nominations and the beginning of voting?

Edit: To be clear, under current law, there is a pause of 1 day for Special elections and 3 days for General and Judicial elections between the end of nominations and the beginning of voting. I imagine this period is required to allow the full list of candidates to be known in advance of the beginning of voting.
 
Considering how long the voting period is, even being shortened to five days in this bill, that's still plenty of time to familiarize oneself with the ballot and cast an informed vote. I've always seen the waiting period between nominations and voting as totally pointless, and it struck me as the most peculiar thing about TNP when I first joined, shortly before a general election cycle.

Now, of course, I know that the most peculiar thing about TNP is Eluvatar.
 
Crushing Our Enemies:
Now, of course, I know that the most peculiar thing about TNP is Eluvatar.
Click to expand...
2254665-6a0120a721c2d7970b0133f17599dd970b_800wi.jpg
 
The pause was intended to give the elections commissioners time to verify the eligibility of candidates to be on the ballot. This would especially be true when a candidate was nominated or declared for office on the last day of nominations.

Not having any time creates the possibility of an invalid election by having an ineligible candidate on the ballot because there was no time for vetting or even seeking court review before voting opened.

It dates back to before 2007 actually, although IIRC the first statutorily defined calendar may have been in the 2006-07 time frame.
 
I'm likely to vote nay because if questions like the pause are coming up after formal debate, then that only underscores my point that we're not ready for a vote yet. Giving a few more days for everyone to think through the proposed changes will avoid a likely corrections bill to fix those things that weren't thought through because the revision of the bill came so late in the process and gave the impression of being rushed through.
 
No. That is not needed. As someone who has served as an EC here multiple times I always checked the validity of candidates as soon as they accepted a nomination or declared they are running.

Our election cycle is currently way too long and shortening to the times in this bill is something I strongly approve of.
 
flemingovia:
Grosseschnauzer:
Not to mention that historically, December is all but a built-in slow period in NS and that has never changed in the decade since I first been involved in NS.
Click to expand...
To allay the Assembly member's concerts, statistically December is not all that slow in TNP (except, understandably, for the few days around Christmas)

Here are the board posting statistics for the academic year beginning September 2012. You will see the December's post count is actually about mid-table in terms of activity.

August 2013 2,469 (lower)
July 2013 2,793 (lower)
June 2013 4,897
May 2013 3,172
April 2013 2,394 (lower)
March 2013 3,409
February 2013 2,428 (lower)
January 2013 3,630
December 2012 2,954
November 2012 5,737
October 2012 1,995 (lower)
September 2012 3,598

In short, I think the Regional Assembly can handle a legislative agenda in December.
Click to expand...
Going back one year is not representative of the decade before that.

Historically December has been a slow period in TNP. Just looking back at one December in that time is a form of selective amnesia.
 
I don't think elections are too long, but then I love everything about them, so it could be just me. We had voting for 7 days to accomodate people who like to have a block of time (on a weekend or day off, perhaps?) to read through all the campaign threads and make a decision on who to vote for. The period for campaigning was to allow all the candidates to post their platforms and entertain questions. I'm not sure how we will get debates rolling with the shorter window.

The changes are not a deal-breaker for me. I support the bill, and I am willing to give the new schedule a try.
 
Mum: I think most candidates currently post their campaigns once they accept nominations, during the nomination period. I don't really see the merit to a block of time only allotted to campaigning... people rarely seriously quiz the candidates, and as several past elections have demonstrated, I'm not sure anybody but incredibly new players actually uses the campaign to inform how they vote.
 
Grosseschnauzer:
Going back one year is not representative of the decade before that.

Historically December has been a slow period in TNP. Just looking back at one December in that time is a form of selective amnesia.
Click to expand...
I picked the wrong December to suit your argument? No problem. let's look at a few other Decembers, together with surrounding months. Let's see if December is a significantly quieter month:

January 2006 8,410
December 2005 7,859
November 2005 3,668

Nope.

January 2007 5,444
December 2006 5,427
November 2006 6,126

Nope.

January 2007 5,444
December 2006 5,427
November 2006 6,126

Nope.

January 2008 3,342
December 2007 1,841
November 2007 1,815

Nope

January 2009 1,087
December 2008 1,081
November 2008 1,271

Nope.

January 2010 816
December 2009 351
November 2009 449

Maybe a little bit. But this was a really slow period overall.

January 2011 2,657
December 2010 943
November 2010 854

Nope.

January 2012 761
December 2011 478
November 2011 503

Nope.

In fact, looking at the actual data December is not significantly lower - going back as far as this forum has been in existence. Sadly, I cannot access data for old blue.

Anyway ... back on track....
 
:lol:

Brilliant. Personally, if I were to make an argument that a data set wasn't representative, I'd at least check to make sure I was right before I made the argument. :eyeroll:

I do agree that the election period is too long.
 
SillyString:
Mum: I think most candidates currently post their campaigns once they accept nominations, during the nomination period. I don't really see the merit to a block of time only allotted to campaigning... people rarely seriously quiz the candidates, and as several past elections have demonstrated, I'm not sure anybody but incredibly new players actually uses the campaign to inform how they vote.
Click to expand...
Well, color me naive, because I use the campaign threads to help me decide who I'm voting for. I suppose I could just vote for my friends or whoever my friends are voting for, but I like to see newcomers get a shot.

As far as quizzing the candidates, I've enjoyed some of the great questions you have asked. I thought they were really spot-on.

With the shorter window for campaigning, someone who waits until the last day to decide to run is at a distinct disadvantage. Fewer people will have read his platform before going to the polls.
 
Wouldn't they be at a disadvantage anyway, with their campaign being up for less time than their competitors'?

And I think you may be quite exceptional, Mum - though I admit that I was myself swayed to vote for flem in the judicial election by his campaign, it's not often that I'm surprised by what campaign threads actually contain.
 
Not necessarily. The main thing is to keep your campaign thread on page 1 of the active topics. It's hard to sustain it for 2 weeks, but having only a day or two doesn't give you much time to generate a buzz.

Compare it to RL elections. Don't you get sick of hearing those ads when they start too early? You say, "Oh, him again. Go away." But then there's that write-in candidate who hands you a flyer just as you're walking into the polls. Then you think, "Who is this guy? I don't really know enough about him or what his plans are." So betweenn those two extremes, there's kind of a sweet spot.

Did I mention I love elections? I am interested in seeing how tweaking the timeframe plays out here.
 
I've voted aye because we will be able to revise the election schedule further and there are definitely many who think our elections are currently too long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top