Department of Justice – Attorney General Truman

[OBD]

If this is the place to ask the Attorney General a question about election law. Is it legal to contact a voter after they posted a ballot to ask them to edit a ballot, to change the preferences or to add office they didn't fill on the ballot.

This is legal - the khuzifenq/cookiedamage controversy last election resolved this.

[OBD]

If this is the place to ask the Attorney General a question about election law. Is it legal to contact a voter after they posted a ballot to ask them to edit a ballot, to change the preferences or to add office they didn't fill on the ballot.

This is legal - the khuzifenq/cookiedamage controversy last election resolved this.

Was it actually decided by the court, or was it "resolved" as in people stopped arguing about it for a while?

I mean, I think there was gonna be some kind of legal challenge as the election was tied and this thing decided it, but then the challengers decided not to bring the case to court. I'm assuming this was because they realized there was no legal basis for challenging those votes, and as an involved party I'm sure this situation is similarly legally unimpeachable.

[OBD]

If this is the place to ask the Attorney General a question about election law. Is it legal to contact a voter after they posted a ballot to ask them to edit a ballot, to change the preferences or to add office they didn't fill on the ballot.

Not the attorney general but here is my guess.

Currently, the Federal Electoral Act and the constitution specify the reasons why a ballot can be invalidated (among those, editing after 20 minutes or posting twice are included). However they say nothing about asking people to edit; so I don't think there is a good argument for a civil case.

As for a criminal case, back in the pre-reset days the law was a bit stricter on this regard and there was sort of a precedent involving LeBron Fitzgerald. However our current laws are a bit more relaxed. The relevant crime in Atlasia for something like this would be Electoral Intimidation:

(f) Electoral Intimidation. This offence shall be defined as the placing of undue pressure on a citizen of the Republic to cast a ballot in a particular way, to not cast a ballot at all, or to invalidate a ballot already cast via direct threats of revenge, blackmail, or retribution. In those cases in which undue pressure has been applied in the form of credible threats to disclose personal information, the offence shall be known as Grievous Electoral Intimidation.

So in other words, unless you can prove that a certain voter was blackmailed or intimidated, it seems to be legal.

There is however another crime that could be argued to have happened, that being Election Fraud:

(d) Electoral Fraud. This offence shall be defined as the manipulation of of the republic's electoral procedures and practices with the aim of fraudulently altering the results of a specific electoral contest.

You can argue that PMing someone to invalidate their vote is a manipulation of electoral practices; but that is not the greatest of interpretations. In fact under a very loose interpretation you could even argue that PMing people about the election at all should be illegal!

So I wonder what that crime is meant to prevent but whatever.

TL;DR: I am like 95% sure that PMing someone like that is legal

Well, in the real world sending people flyers for the election, probably the closest thing to PMing, is most definitely not fraud, but telling somebody to go back into the booth and vote for the "correct candidate" certainly would be illegal. I don't see why people consider it acceptable regardless of legality anyway, if people vote a way that you don't like you should honestly just deal with it and this whole PMing people afterwards thing is a total abuse of the grace period which was only intended for mistakes, not post-vote campaigning. I'd like to see a system where people's posts in the booth are anonymous until after the election ends but I have no idea if the forum is even capable of that.

The bolded idea would be a nightmare for everyone - first off, Virginia would have to put in a ton of work to make it happen, and as literally no one would know the results until later the entire election night vibe will be ruined. It's fair that you hold these opinions, but Atlasia is district from real life - the letter of the law is clear in this case, and at least in my purview it is not unacceptable to operate for your party and ideals within the boundaries of the legal system.

[OBD]

If this is the place to ask the Attorney General a question about election law. Is it legal to contact a voter after they posted a ballot to ask them to edit a ballot, to change the preferences or to add office they didn't fill on the ballot.

Not the attorney general but here is my guess.

Currently, the Federal Electoral Act and the constitution specify the reasons why a ballot can be invalidated (among those, editing after 20 minutes or posting twice are included). However they say nothing about asking people to edit; so I don't think there is a good argument for a civil case.

As for a criminal case, back in the pre-reset days the law was a bit stricter on this regard and there was sort of a precedent involving LeBron Fitzgerald. However our current laws are a bit more relaxed. The relevant crime in Atlasia for something like this would be Electoral Intimidation:

(f) Electoral Intimidation. This offence shall be defined as the placing of undue pressure on a citizen of the Republic to cast a ballot in a particular way, to not cast a ballot at all, or to invalidate a ballot already cast via direct threats of revenge, blackmail, or retribution. In those cases in which undue pressure has been applied in the form of credible threats to disclose personal information, the offence shall be known as Grievous Electoral Intimidation.

So in other words, unless you can prove that a certain voter was blackmailed or intimidated, it seems to be legal.

There is however another crime that could be argued to have happened, that being Election Fraud:

(d) Electoral Fraud. This offence shall be defined as the manipulation of of the republic's electoral procedures and practices with the aim of fraudulently altering the results of a specific electoral contest.

You can argue that PMing someone to invalidate their vote is a manipulation of electoral practices; but that is not the greatest of interpretations. In fact under a very loose interpretation you could even argue that PMing people about the election at all should be illegal!

So I wonder what that crime is meant to prevent but whatever.

TL;DR: I am like 95% sure that PMing someone like that is legal

Well, in the real world sending people flyers for the election, probably the closest thing to PMing, is most definitely not fraud, but telling somebody to go back into the booth and vote for the "correct candidate" certainly would be illegal. I don't see why people consider it acceptable regardless of legality anyway, if people vote a way that you don't like you should honestly just deal with it and this whole PMing people afterwards thing is a total abuse of the grace period which was only intended for mistakes, not post-vote campaigning. I'd like to see a system where people's posts in the booth are anonymous until after the election ends but I have no idea if the forum is even capable of that.

The bolded idea would be a nightmare for everyone - first off, Virginia would have to put in a ton of work to make it happen, and as literally no one would know the results until later the entire election night vibe will be ruined. It's fair that you hold these opinions, but Atlasia is district from real life - the letter of the law is clear in this case, and at least in my purview it is not unacceptable to operate for your party and ideals within the boundaries of the legal system.

People in Atlasia have a right to vote for any candidate that they want, regardless of party. If someone in my party doesn't vote for my party's candidate I don't try to change it because I respect their right to vote for any candidate they want to. It would seem that Labor does not respect this and tries desperately to change people's votes if they don't vote the way that they wanted them. There is a campaigning time and then there is election time. If you've failed to get somebody's vote before the vote then you've failed to truly win their vote. Maybe if you have a defection problem you should try to address the reason why you got defections and try harder next time instead of having a fit every single time on of your members votes for someone else.

I would reveal our PMs if it wasn't a despicable violation of privacy, but Labor respects our voters - we never coerce or threaten voters in PMs - otherwise, why would they switch their votes to us? And frankly, you're only complaining about this since, apparently, you've insufficiently won over your voters to a level where a short PM with voting instructions can flip them in less than 20 minutes. Sorry not sorry.

[OBD]

NP

NICE JOB OBD.

Kindly refrain from revealing my PMs to the public. I did not give permission, and I expect an immediate retraction and apology for this blatant privacy violation.

[OBD]

If this is the place to ask the Attorney General a question about election law. Is it legal to contact a voter after they posted a ballot to ask them to edit a ballot, to change the preferences or to add office they didn't fill on the ballot.

Not the attorney general but here is my guess.

Currently, the Federal Electoral Act and the constitution specify the reasons why a ballot can be invalidated (among those, editing after 20 minutes or posting twice are included). However they say nothing about asking people to edit; so I don't think there is a good argument for a civil case.

As for a criminal case, back in the pre-reset days the law was a bit stricter on this regard and there was sort of a precedent involving LeBron Fitzgerald. However our current laws are a bit more relaxed. The relevant crime in Atlasia for something like this would be Electoral Intimidation:

(f) Electoral Intimidation. This offence shall be defined as the placing of undue pressure on a citizen of the Republic to cast a ballot in a particular way, to not cast a ballot at all, or to invalidate a ballot already cast via direct threats of revenge, blackmail, or retribution. In those cases in which undue pressure has been applied in the form of credible threats to disclose personal information, the offence shall be known as Grievous Electoral Intimidation.

So in other words, unless you can prove that a certain voter was blackmailed or intimidated, it seems to be legal.

There is however another crime that could be argued to have happened, that being Election Fraud:

(d) Electoral Fraud. This offence shall be defined as the manipulation of of the republic's electoral procedures and practices with the aim of fraudulently altering the results of a specific electoral contest.

You can argue that PMing someone to invalidate their vote is a manipulation of electoral practices; but that is not the greatest of interpretations. In fact under a very loose interpretation you could even argue that PMing people about the election at all should be illegal!

So I wonder what that crime is meant to prevent but whatever.

TL;DR: I am like 95% sure that PMing someone like that is legal

Well, in the real world sending people flyers for the election, probably the closest thing to PMing, is most definitely not fraud, but telling somebody to go back into the booth and vote for the "correct candidate" certainly would be illegal. I don't see why people consider it acceptable regardless of legality anyway, if people vote a way that you don't like you should honestly just deal with it and this whole PMing people afterwards thing is a total abuse of the grace period which was only intended for mistakes, not post-vote campaigning. I'd like to see a system where people's posts in the booth are anonymous until after the election ends but I have no idea if the forum is even capable of that.

The bolded idea would be a nightmare for everyone - first off, Virginia would have to put in a ton of work to make it happen, and as literally no one would know the results until later the entire election night vibe will be ruined. It's fair that you hold these opinions, but Atlasia is district from real life - the letter of the law is clear in this case, and at least in my purview it is not unacceptable to operate for your party and ideals within the boundaries of the legal system.

People in Atlasia have a right to vote for any candidate that they want, regardless of party. If someone in my party doesn't vote for my party's candidate I don't try to change it because I respect their right to vote for any candidate they want to. It would seem that Labor does not respect this and tries desperately to change people's votes if they don't vote the way that they wanted them. There is a campaigning time and then there is election time. If you've failed to get somebody's vote before the vote then you've failed to truly win their vote. Maybe if you have a defection problem you should try to address the reason why you got defections and try harder next time instead of having a fit every single time on of your members votes for someone else.

I would reveal our PMs if it wasn't a despicable violation of privacy, but Labor respects our voters - we never coerce or threaten voters in PMs - otherwise, why would they switch their votes to us? And frankly, you're only complaining about this since, apparently, you've insufficiently won over your voters to a level where a short PM with voting instructions can flip them in less than 20 minutes. Sorry not sorry.

If PMs are all sent beforehand then logically the voters wouldn't switch, as they've seen all the PMs and would have made up their minds when they voted. A small handful might make mistakes, but other than that there would be no reason to change. That obviously isn't what happens, especially considering the long time frames resulting in invalidation that have occurred several times.

We both know this isn't the case. Voter education among 'zombies' is incredibly low, and one or two honeyed PMs can easily flip a voter where such deception could never pass among more active players. Neither side can know when this is happening (because of privacy), so it's only natural that we set the record straight when we learn this is happening. Again, this would not occur IRL, but Atlasia is distinct from IRL and I see no nonpartisan reason to ban this perfectly legal tactic - pioneered by your Vice President, too!

[OBD]

NP

NICE JOB OBD.

Kindly refrain from revealing my PMs to the public. I did not give permission, and I expect an immediate retraction and apology for this blatant privacy violation.

You and your party don't care about privacy. Your party tried to get spies in the DA to leak our strategy.

I frankly don't care what Labor thinks of privacy. I do know that you did not get my permission to reveal the PM to the public, and pathetic whataboutism does not erase your offense.

[OBD]

NP

NICE JOB OBD.

Kindly refrain from revealing my PMs to the public. I did not give permission, and I expect an immediate retraction and apology for this blatant privacy violation.

You and your party don't care about privacy. Your party tried to get spies in the DA to leak our strategy.

I frankly don't care what Labor thinks of privacy. I do know that you did not get my permission to reveal the PM to the public, and pathetic whataboutism does not erase your offense.

I got the permission of the person you sent it to.

But you didn't get mine. That's a violation of the Terms of Service.

And while people can see it in the interim between it gets deleted for ToS violation, it's absolutely clear that literally no coercion took place.

[OBD]

Guys can we do this elsewhere? We don't have to clutter up the Attorney General's office thread.

I agree. S019, Ishan, if you have more to say take it to Discord.