Campaign to raise awareness about Re-open Nominations

Fregerson

Secretly here
-
-
-
TNP Nation
PotatoFarmers
Discord
Freg#0420
This is a campaign thread, by somebody who is not running for any posts, and for somebody (if you count Re-open nominations as a person) who is always on the ballot, but largely ignored. And yes, it is strange I am doing this, but our circumstances are even stranger.

I understand this elections is likely going to be one of the most open races for quite a bit. We have 4 candidates for delegate: St George/Madjack, Dreadton, Comfed, and MTDemocracy. We have 3 for Vice Delegate: Blue Wolf, Lord Dominator/Lady Raven Wing, and Kasto. And just 1 for Speaker: Venicea. None of the incumbents are running to keep their positions. The Vice Delegate is going to get someone who hasn't sat on the Security Council in recent years. Which is why, all the more, it is important to ask question of the candidates. Find out more about the candidates. And most importantly, make sure they are the deserving candidate for the position.

I am not going to be here commenting on each of the candidates, and giving my analysis on who to pick. I am here, instead, to counter-propose an alternative, something which may be treated as a joke, or often misunderstood.

The candidate, standing under the name of "re-open nominations", has been on the ballot box for quite a long time. In fact, since we implemented the option as part of our elections. It has been on every election as an auto include, as something which people can vote yes to. Some view voting for this candidate as the "nuclear option". I see it as a way of expressing my honest viewpoint on the slate of candidates.

For a start, we can talk about the basics of this mechanism. The option to re-open nominations is separate from selecting the candidates. In many voting processes across NationStates, they might be included as an option alongside the candidate options. But not here in TNP. Come September 6th, when voting opens, everyone will be able to see the voting slip format. After selecting your options, you will see an additional question. "Would you like to reopen nominations?" And then, you have to answer yes or no to make your vote valid. Most people default to no. But should at least 50% of voters vote yes to that option, the nominations process is reopened, candidates can decide if they want to continue running, while other people may declare their candidacy. And this is decided separately from selecting a candidate. So if a majority voted candidate A to be Delegate, and more than 50% chose to reopen nominations, we are still going to open nominations. If we don't get to reopen nominations, your vote still counts.

How about Abstain, you may ask? I would say there are only 2 reasons to vote Abstain. One, you vote Abstain to say "I am indifferent to all the candidates". Whichever candidate is elected, you are happy they are elected. Or at least, feel the same. The other reason is because you are a candidate, and you want to show your neutrality.

A vote to reopen nominations (RoN), in my opinion, is different. And there are generally a few reasons for it.

1) You want to run, but you miss the candidacy declaration.
After looking at all the candidates, you think you will make a better candidate than all of them. So you decide to call on others to vote RoN, and hope nominations reopen so that you can put yourself in.

2) You want some other candidate to run.
Maybe there is a guy who belongs to 1. Or maybe, you are not satisfied with the slate of candidates. You want to wait for someone else that you think is a better fit.

3) You need more time to reconsider
It is an extension of 2, but you may not be looking for a new candidate. Honestly, I have done this quite a number of times before. The series of candidates are good, but sometimes, you are waiting for the answer that makes you say "That is the person I am looking for". Or makes you more convinced about his credentials. A reopen nominations extends the election period by another 5 days, so, why not try it?

4) Not satisified, but still acceptable
It is another extension from 2. Similar to 3, but in a different way. You would have made a firm choice for 1 or 2 particular candidates. But unlike 3, the responses thus far has been lacking. If a better candidate is here, you will definitely choose that candidate. But your current option is not too bad in your opinion, but you think he could do better. You hope that with a re-open message, you can signal the message that you want the elected candidate to consider/reconsider some concerns raised.

There are probably more reasons, but the 4 above are some of the reasons which I feel, explains why I may vote RoN when I do so. It doesn't have to be done when we disagree with all of the candidates. In fact, I would prefer certain candidates, and yet choose to reopen nominations at the same time. And I hope that this will give voters more awareness about reopening nominations. You should understand that it is a right you have. And you don't have to necessarily just submit 3 abstains and 0 reopen nominations, simply because you have not been satisfied with the slate of candidates.
 
I don't disagree with your outline of why people might vote RON, but it's incredibly difficult for RON to get a majority without a sustained serious campaign to get people to choose it. Are you engaging in this unprecedented RON campaign because you feel the nominations should be re-opened for this particular election? If so, why?
 
Perhaps the only time I have selected RON is when a seat is uncontested. In the big picture, competition is good for the lifeblood of the offices being sought after. As a voter, having choices just makes it more exciting.
 
If elected, who would be your Cabinet?
If elected, the rum cabinet will be our Cabinet, with the captial C.

I don't disagree with your outline of why people might vote RON, but it's incredibly difficult for RON to get a majority without a sustained serious campaign to get people to choose it. Are you engaging in this unprecedented RON campaign because you feel the nominations should be re-opened for this particular election? If so, why?
I would say that my opinion of RON has changed a lot from my time in NationStates. My intent is to provide a perspective on RON, which I felt was lacking in TNP. I am just making clear that, at a point where we feel none of these candidates fit the bill, or that we have a compelling reason to not support anyone, we should be open to voting for RON. It isn't that bad as it seems, because it would definitely be better than having to recall one of these elected members mid-way through the term. And even though you and me may understand, yes, this is how RON should be used, I don't think RON is understood by many of the newer people. My intention is merely to post this as an awareness campaign, not targetting any position, and I don't intend to push aggressively for a particular RON. I do have a particular post in mind, which I feel should be RONed, but I wouldn't go all out for it, because while I feel that there could be candidates who are better suited for the post, looking at background, track record and all, I think I am willing to give these candidates a try, whichever is elected.
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but you did not nominate anyone. Why raise this when you also thought no one is good enough for the positions? (If it is not what you intended, I can let you know it is how it can be interpreted.)
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but you did not nominate anyone. Why raise this when you also thought no one is good enough for the positions? (If it is not what you intended, I can let you know it is how it can be interpreted.)
The reason why I specifically didn't launch a campaign to RON for a particular office, is exactly because I am not particularly upset with the current pool of candidates. It is just that, well, given the currenr circumstances, I want to show that it isn't wrong to vote RON, that RON isn't an option which should be ignored, and well, raise awareness to anyone who may be new and unsure how the RON can and will be applied to these elections.

As for why I didn't nominate anyone? In fact, the people I want to nominate has been on the nominee list. It is just that not every one of them have chosen to run. I wouldn't say who they are, because that will be revealing my voting patterns (and I tend to vote privately). There is no need to nominate nominated people again, since candidates need to accept their nominations to get on the ballot. And to be fair, it is up to the candidates to prove that they are worthy of the spot, through their campaign threads and Q&A sessions. They have some time on the clock, and if they can prove they are okay, then there may be no need to vote RON at all.
 
I vote RON if I think all the candidates are mediocre or if there’s only one serious candidate.
 
Back
Top