Confirmation of Wonderess as Election Commissioner

Deropia

Peasant Wizard
-
Pronouns
He/Him
TNP Nation
Deropia
Discord
Dero#2736
mcmasterdonia:
I hereby appoint @Wonderess to the Election Commission subject to a confirmation vote by the regional assembly.
The Delegate has appointed @Wonderess to the Election Commission. This appointment is subject to a confirmation vote by the Regional Assembly. The Speakers Office now opens the floor to the debate regarding this confirmation.
 
Darcania, Siwale, Angshire, Dreadton, Sil Dorsett, Scottie, and soon-to-be Fregerson... we need another Election Commissioner why?
 
I'm unsure where this rhetoric of "too many Commissioners" even comes from. This argument was already dismissed as nonsense for many more recent nominations to the Security Council, why should it apply here? The law allows for between 5 and 9 commissioners, and if there are enough volunteers willing to oversee elections, why should we deny them that because we have some already?

If 9 is too much, a separate thread would be in order to lower that legal maximum.
 
Wonderess and Fregerson were appointed to replace Lore/Robes who both finished up. In that sense, the number is not that different. Given there has in the past been situations where too many were absent, I was keen to avoid this reoccurring.
 
Wonderess and Fregerson were appointed to replace Lore/Robes who both finished up. In that sense, the number is not that different. Given there has in the past been situations where too many were absent, I was keen to avoid this reoccurring.
Was the possibility of Robes/Lore staying on explored at any point?
 
Do you intend to stand in two or more of the next three regularly scheduled elections, excluding the upcoming Judicial election, which will probably pass before confirmation can conclude?

In relation to the quasi-judicial function in reviewing the decisions of supervisors of elections, what qualities (and, if considered relevant, experiences) do you have that would assist in carrying out that function?

Does you take any view on when it may be appropriate to exercise the Commission's power to replace Election Supervisors?

How would you count this ballot (presuming that only the candidates shown are standing):

Delegate:

1. Abstain
2. McMasterdonia
3. Madjack
4. Midir

Would you like to reopen nominations? Yes

Vice Delegate: Darcania | Abstain

Would you like to reopen nominations? No

Speaker:

a. Abstain
b. SillyString
c. COE

Would you like to reopen nominations? Yes
 
Was the possibility of Robes/Lore staying on explored at any point?
No. I made a judgement call that both of them have positions that are both demanding of their time. Secondly, I feel they are both likely to be absent due to seeking re-election. Thirdly, they understand elections now and this is an opportunity for more people to learn how those work.
 
Do you intend to stand in two or more of the next three regularly scheduled elections, excluding the upcoming Judicial election, which will probably pass before confirmation can conclude?

It is hard to know for sure what the future will bring, but I do not currently have aspirations to run for the Delegacy, Vice Delegacy, or Speakership.

In relation to the quasi-judicial function in reviewing the decisions of supervisors of elections, what qualities (and, if considered relevant, experiences) do you have that would assist in carrying out that function?

I was Speaker of the Regional Assembly which gave me some experience with procedural matters. In regard to decisions being made by the supervisors, I like to consider every angle of a situation so that a fair and just decision may always be upheld. I think my contemplative nature and my honesty will be of service to the EC and make its accountability to the people of the region evermore a consideration. I will consider the case in a similar way I do arguments and ideas in public. What you have seen of me in the community is what you will get from me in any job I have in the region.

Does you take any view on when it may be appropriate to exercise the Commission's power to replace Election Supervisors?

There would have to be an incredible show if irresponsibility whether that be neglect, partiality, or some other hindrance to the election contest. of course would not come to this conclusion on my own as consideration with other election commissioners would be of great importance, especially since we share in the responsibility of protecting and maintaining the integrity of the election process.

How would you count this ballot (presuming that only the candidates shown are standing):

I would not count the votes for Delegate, Vice Delegate, or Speaker as those are incorrect ranking procedures. I would however be willing to count the tallies for the reopening of nominations since those preferences are distinct and in line with the rules. I of course would never make a unilateral decision and would seek deliberation from the rest of the EC as to decide on the correct course of action.
 
I would not count the votes for Delegate, Vice Delegate, or Speaker as those are incorrect ranking procedures. I would however be willing to count the tallies for the reopening of nominations since those preferences are distinct and in line with the rules. I of course would never make a unilateral decision and would seek deliberation from the rest of the EC as to decide on the correct course of action.

Why do you say that they are incorrectly ranked?
 
"Abstain" is not a candidate so it cannot be counted as an electoral preference in my view.
It is possible to abstain in elections, is it not?

Even if the abstentions are not counted, does that prevent counting of those candidates subsequent to the abstentions in the ranking?
 
It is possible to abstain in elections, is it not?

Even if the abstentions are not counted, does that prevent counting of those candidates subsequent to the abstentions in the ranking?
I would say yes. Considering the most recent general election, the following notice was placed in the original post: If abstaining from voting in any race, do not fill in the second or subsequent options. They will not be considered.
To abstain means not to vote in any capacity, therefore considering the other rankings would not be a form of abstention. This along with the precedent that has been set by the EC would make counting the other ranks under abstain an unviable course of action.
 
I would say yes. Considering the most recent general election, the following notice was placed in the original post: If abstaining from voting in any race, do not fill in the second or subsequent options. They will not be considered.
To abstain means not to vote in any capacity, therefore considering the other rankings would not be a form of abstention. This along with the precedent that has been set by the EC would make counting the other ranks under abstain an unviable course of action.
Noting what is stated, why does it follow that the abstentions should not be counted, being they are first and that it is possible to abstain?
 
Noting what is stated, why does it follow that the abstentions should not be counted, being they are first and that it is possible to abstain?
The Legal Code:
6. "Abstentions" are not votes for or against any candidate, and may not be used to determine the results of any election. They may be used for quorum, activity, or other purposes.
7. "Candidates" are those citizens who, during the period of the election designated for candidacy declarations, declare themselves or accept a nomination by another citizen as a candidate for an office to be chosen at that election.
In my view, because abstentions are considered a separate preference from any candidate, one cannot both abstain and set a preference for candidates in one action. I am aware the Islands of Tonga incident came to a different conclusion, but this is my honest view of such a situation. I believe the first duty of an Election Commissioner is to the integrity of elections as they are protected and presented by law. If this situation were to occur again, this would be my viewpoint, but I would of course support the majority view of the Commission. I do not believe that abstaining and then voting for a candidate in the same race are reconcilable. The most charitable read would be to count such a vote as an abstention since that was the first action listed, however if the voter would not change their vote after being alerted of the issue then speculating about intention would be difficult which would make throwing out that particular vote of office a prudent decision.
 
Back
Top