SENATE BILL: Vote Sanctity Act (Law'd)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Pres...er Senator Napoleon.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senator you have 24 hours to begin advocating for this.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What about the first two minutes or so that the forum does not track? How can you ban something that you can't see is a occuring?


Edit: Example.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It would probably be best in my opinion to state that clearly, yes.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Origination
Status: Senators have 24 hours to object.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

If you accept the rationale that people should be allowed to fix their potential mistakes, then you can't possibly seriously think 5 minutes if enough time to be alerted to them and fix them. At this point, this is tinkering for the sake of tinkering.

Five minutes is plenty of time to review and edit a post.

Not on a dialup connection

"This Page Can't Be Displayed"
"Your Session Timed Out" - even though I am logged in perpetually this still happens
"We're Sorry, Something Happened While Browsing. Please wait while we restart your browser"
"An error has occured, We are restarting your software" 

I dodge atleast one of these every day. I even lost the first version of that PM I sent the Senators a few hours ago, because of the first one. Sometimes the last one requires a computer shutdown and restart to get the internet to work. Just loading the interent software itself takes ten to twenty minutes sometimes. I nearly have a heart attack everytime I have voted on this site ever since I joined because of this, as it is.

Missinformation is a chronic problem in Atlasia and torturing dial up and mobile users is not going to stop people from lying about laws and lying about people behind the scenes. If we have a problem with election laws being lied about, then I suggest we type up a generic boilerplate PM including links and summaries of the voting rules, get maybe six or seven volunteers, divide up the voting list and hand feed the rules to the less active voters. The active ones can request that they be off the list since they should now or know how to find out.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

In the previous discussion, Yankee provides a good reason to dislike both banning edits and reducing the window to five minutes:

The cause of the problem is not vote editing. The cause of the problem is the person who is abusing the law to achieve his unjust ends. Go after them, and ride them into the ground.

Removing vote editing entirely is the wrong approach. It would be like banning all forms of "advised/consulted investing" as a response to all these ponzi schemes being uncovered, lately.

Or dare I say, banning all guns because guns can be used to kill. 

An interesting strategy. If something is abused, get rid of it. The trouble is, anything can be abused. The intimidation and such will take place before the election. The schemers will find a new industry which to use as a front, and the murderers will switch to knives or poison. I guess then we would just stop having elections, or ban every form of cuting utencil. Sorry cooks, these things have too much potential for abuse. Find another way to dice onions. We are sorry for the inconvenience.

Imagine if we got rid of all posters as a response to an account being hacked. Those damned posters serve only to be abused you know.

The other problem is that such a law is completely worthless since there is no way to prove whether or not someone edited a vote within the first 2 minutes. This fact of life produced by the forum software creates inequality of enforcement based largely on wealth, IE that supposed irrelevancy of the connection speed.

The fact is you can't ban vote editing as long as the forum doesn't display whether editing took place in the first two minutes. You can only reduce it to that level of 2 minutes. At which point you might as well raise it to a level appropriate to allow an equal opportunity for all posters to edit their posts for correction purposes.

I've had high speed internet from years, but I know of at least several Atlasian citizens who still do not. Furthermore, those posting from mobile devices might be dealing with slower connections as well.

You treat it like a work in progress, which is how most do. "You'll get it eventually, just be patient". We have been discussing high speed internet (logics, cables, costs etc etc) since Hillary was going to be the 44th President of the United States. If anything we are further away from getting it now, then we were then. This road doesn't lead in one direction. There are two internets. Those who have high speed and those who don't. Those who can watch Youtube videos in real time and those who need 40 minutes to watch 3. There are about 3,000,000 million users of AOL Dialup alone in 2011. There is also NetZero and many other smaller providers out there, so maybe 6 to 10 million people. It was dropping like a rock, until 2006-2008, then it started to go back up again as people dropped back to save money. I haven't read anything about a resumption in the decline.

I don't think this work in progress, gets finished Nix.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Amendment 53:28 has been adopted:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Working on the new amendments...

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Origination
Status: Senators have 24 hours to object.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Hostile
Status: Vote to start pending completion of 53:32.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

My connection has a sense of humor, I try to fix the number typos:

The web address you entered could not be found

[more information]

You were trying to go to https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?action=post;msg=3633288;topic=169600.75;sesc=3a607bf4b047e0b1743b59beae531375

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Amendment 53:32 has been adopted.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Hostile
Status: The above amendment is now at vote, please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain. 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AYE, Lets go after the crooks themselves!!!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Amendment 53:34 by Franzl

Aye (: Averroës Nix, Ben, Franzl, HagridOfTheDeep, jdb NC Yankee, Oakvale and Spamage
Nay (1): Napoleon
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (1): JulioMadrid

The amendment has been adopted.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senators, this bill is now at final vote, please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AYE OF COURSE!!!


Vote on final passage of the Vote Sanctity Act:

Aye (: Averroës Nix, Ben, Franzl (its a miracle), HagridoftheDeep, jdb, Napoleon, NC Yankee and Oakvale.
Nay (0):
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (2): JulioMadrid and Spamage

The bill has passed the Senate and is presented to the President for executive action.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Didn't Vote (3): Oakvale

Aye.

If I drank, I would blame it on the alcohol.

Just remember, that I was the first one to push for such ornate vote total displays (stolen entirely from C-Span of course).