Wiki Update

[Brandon H]

The old content from Assad's wiki has finally been copied over. The content for an already existing page has been posted in the talk section. Next step is to combine the two.

[Gabu]

I am about to update the voter rolls on the wiki remove or * those who did not vote in the last election. However, no official indication has been given by the SoFA on who this would include. Should I update as see fit, or just wait until we get a new SoFA confirmed?

Is the new voter roll list on the Wiki known to be accurate at least regarding everyone who was registered before the election?  Because if so, I can compare the people on that list to the list of people who voted in the last election (or you can, if you so desire, but I'd probably do it myself independently just to make sure).  I ask because I've found at least three different lists of voter rolls, none of which agree with the others, so I'd like to be sure that I'm starting with the most up-to-date version possible.

I do intend to overhaul that particular Wiki page in the near future if confirmed as SoFA as well as using it as a centralized location to place the voter rolls.  I find it a bit goofy how difficult it currently is to find a comprehensive list known to be correct of the voters in Atlasia.

And while none affect any outcomes in the election, one voter deleted his vote and several voters registered after the 10 day deadline and voted anyway. Does a voter who voted and then deleted his vote still count as having voted?

Regarding the 10-day deadline, Article V, Section 2, Clause 4 of the Constitution states the following:

"In order to vote or be a candidate in an election, a person must have been a registered voter on the tenth day before that election."

Then, Section 1, Clause 7 of the Consolidated Electoral System Reform Act states the following:

"If a voter shall explicitly cast a vote in a Senate race for which they are not qualified to vote, then the vote in that Senate race shall be considered non-extant."

Therefore, it seems to me that any vote made by someone who registered later than ten days before an election is considered null and void since the person is not qualified to vote in that election and is treated as if it never occurred.

With regards to the impact of this fact on the new voter's state of registration, Article V, Section 2, Clause 6 of the Constitution then goes on to state the following:

"Any first-time registrant who fails to vote in the first scheduled Senate elections for which he is qualified to vote shall have his registration no longer considered valid."

As a person who registered later than ten days before an election is not qualified to vote in that election, whether or not the citizen attempts to vote in the election is irrelevant, because the election will not affect the citizen's status as a registered voter.

As an aside, it appears, oddly enough, that a citizen who votes in the presidential election but not the Senate election will still be affected by the above excerpt despite the fact that the citizen did indeed vote, which seems... strange.  Is there a reason that it specifically specifies Senate elections?

---

Regarding the issue of a deleted vote, there isn't as much of a clear-cut answer found within the Constitution or within legislation (at least not that I can find, at any rate).  However, logically speaking, someone who votes and then deletes his or her vote does not have his or her vote counted in the end result, due to the fact that the vote is treated as if it no longer exists.  I think a logical test to see if a person did indeed vote in an election is simply to examine whether or not something the person did affected the final tally of votes received.  If the person did not affect the tally, then he or she could be considered not to have voted in the election.

As such, I think, barring any legislation stating to the contrary that I am unaware of, it would make sense to consider someone who votes and then deletes his or her vote to not have voted at all in the election, and to alter this voter's registration status accordingly.

[Brandon H]

I am about to update the voter rolls on the wiki remove or * those who did not vote in the last election. However, no official indication has been given by the SoFA on who this would include. Should I update as see fit, or just wait until we get a new SoFA confirmed?

Is the new voter roll list on the Wiki known to be accurate at least regarding everyone who was registered before the election?  Because if so, I can compare the people on that list to the list of people who voted in the last election (or you can, if you so desire, but I'd probably do it myself independently just to make sure).  I ask because I've found at least three different lists of voter rolls, none of which agree with the others, so I'd like to be sure that I'm starting with the most up-to-date version possible.

I do intend to overhaul that particular Wiki page in the near future if confirmed as SoFA as well as using it as a centralized location to place the voter rolls.  I find it a bit goofy how difficult it currently is to find a comprehensive list known to be correct of the voters in Atlasia.

Everything is up to date as of before the election on the "Voter list by name". The other lists, except for by Party, are out of date.

And while none affect any outcomes in the election, one voter deleted his vote and several voters registered after the 10 day deadline and voted anyway. Does a voter who voted and then deleted his vote still count as having voted?

Regarding the 10-day deadline, Article V, Section 2, Clause 4 of the Constitution states the following:

"In order to vote or be a candidate in an election, a person must have been a registered voter on the tenth day before that election."

Then, Section 1, Clause 7 of the Consolidated Electoral System Reform Act states the following:

"If a voter shall explicitly cast a vote in a Senate race for which they are not qualified to vote, then the vote in that Senate race shall be considered non-extant."

Therefore, it seems to me that any vote made by someone who registered later than ten days before an election is considered null and void since the person is not qualified to vote in that election and is treated as if it never occurred.

With regards to the impact of this fact on the new voter's state of registration, Article V, Section 2, Clause 6 of the Constitution then goes on to state the following:

"Any first-time registrant who fails to vote in the first scheduled Senate elections for which he is qualified to vote shall have his registration no longer considered valid."

As a person who registered later than ten days before an election is not qualified to vote in that election, whether or not the citizen attempts to vote in the election is irrelevant, because the election will not affect the citizen's status as a registered voter.

As an aside, it appears, oddly enough, that a citizen who votes in the presidential election but not the Senate election will still be affected by the above excerpt despite the fact that the citizen did indeed vote, which seems... strange.  Is there a reason that it specifically specifies Senate elections?

---

Regarding the issue of a deleted vote, there isn't as much of a clear-cut answer found within the Constitution or within legislation (at least not that I can find, at any rate).  However, logically speaking, someone who votes and then deletes his or her vote does not have his or her vote counted in the end result, due to the fact that the vote is treated as if it no longer exists.  I think a logical test to see if a person did indeed vote in an election is simply to examine whether or not something the person did affected the final tally of votes received.  If the person did not affect the tally, then he or she could be considered not to have voted in the election.

As such, I think, barring any legislation stating to the contrary that I am unaware of, it would make sense to consider someone who votes and then deletes his or her vote to not have voted at all in the election, and to alter this voter's registration status accordingly.

The deleted vote was for DWTL. I think the reason for deleting the vote are obvious. The vote was counted in the PNN thread and at first I thought Akno miscounted the votes. The vote was 4 - 4 - 2wi's (with both wi's going to Gully Foyle). The deleted vote made it 4 - 3 and GF still won the election.

And I guess the reason the constitution states Senate is to apply to midterms, though "regular federal election" would also be accurate.

[Gabu]

Everything is up to date as of before the election on the "Voter list by name". The other lists, except for by Party, are out of date.

Okay, good, that should be good enough.  You can form the other lists from the alphabetical-by-name list, so that shouldn't be a problem.

Also, if you're going to update the voter list, don't forget as well to remove asterisks from those who were previously asterisked but who voted in the last election.

If you're not, I'll get to all of that as soon as I'm confirmed as SoFA.

The deleted vote was for DWTL. I think the reason for deleting the vote are obvious. The vote was counted in the PNN thread and at first I thought Akno miscounted the votes. The vote was 4 - 4 - 2wi's (with both wi's going to Gully Foyle). The deleted vote made it 4 - 3 and GF still won the election.

Right, well, as I said, I could find nothing either in the Constitution or in legislation that deals with deleted votes, so I'm just making my best guess regarding what the logical treatment of them might be.  It seems to me that deleting a vote is akin to stating that the person does not want to vote after all, and I see no reason not to allow that to occur.

I suppose, upon perusing the relevant bits of law a second time, that it could be considered that entirely removing one's vote is certainly an extreme case of editing one's vote (by way of altering it such that it no longer even exists), and Article V, Section 2, Clause 9 of the Constitution states the following:

"Persons who edit the post in which their vote(s) are contained at the place of voting shall have their vote counted as void."

The relevant definition of the word "void" from the dictionary is "having no legal force or effect", so... well, I'm not actually sure.  Being "void" is not the same as not existing at all, and the Constitution only mentions citizens voting in the election; it does not restrict it to requiring valid votes.  It all depends on whether an invalidated vote is still considered a vote for the purposes of one's status on the voter rolls.  I'm leaning towards not considering it a vote, but is there some form of legal precedent behind this?  I vaguely recall something along these lines coming up before, but I wouldn't know where to look.

And I guess the reason the constitution states Senate is to apply to midterms, though "regular federal election" would also be accurate.

Right, I suppose, but the issue I had with that is that as I said, if a person voted in the presidential election but not the Senate election, then technically speaking, the person would be counted as having not voted even if he had.  I can't really envision a case where anyone would actually do that, but I thought I'd make the observation anyway.

[Brandon H]

Everything is up to date as of before the election on the "Voter list by name". The other lists, except for by Party, are out of date.

Okay, good, that should be good enough.  You can form the other lists from the alphabetical-by-name list, so that shouldn't be a problem.

Also, if you're going to update the voter list, don't forget as well to remove asterisks from those who were previously asterisked but who voted in the last election.

If you're not, I'll get to all of that as soon as I'm confirmed as SoFA.

I didn't want to do part of it and not the other which would lead to confusion.

The deleted vote was for DWTL. I think the reason for deleting the vote are obvious. The vote was counted in the PNN thread and at first I thought Akno miscounted the votes. The vote was 4 - 4 - 2wi's (with both wi's going to Gully Foyle). The deleted vote made it 4 - 3 and GF still won the election.

Right, well, as I said, I could find nothing either in the Constitution or in legislation that deals with deleted votes, so I'm just making my best guess regarding what the logical treatment of them might be.  It seems to me that deleting a vote is akin to stating that the person does not want to vote after all, and I see no reason not to allow that to occur.

I suppose, upon perusing the relevant bits of law a second time, that it could be considered that entirely removing one's vote is certainly an extreme case of editing one's vote (by way of altering it such that it no longer even exists), and Article V, Section 2, Clause 9 of the Constitution states the following:

"Persons who edit the post in which their vote(s) are contained at the place of voting shall have their vote counted as void."

The relevant definition of the word "void" from the dictionary is "having no legal force or effect", so... well, I'm not actually sure.  Being "void" is not the same as not existing at all, and the Constitution only mentions citizens voting in the election; it does not restrict it to requiring valid votes.  It all depends on whether an invalidated vote is still considered a vote for the purposes of one's status on the voter rolls.  I'm leaning towards not considering it a vote, but is there some form of legal precedent behind this?  I vaguely recall something along these lines coming up before, but I wouldn't know where to look.

If a voter were to delete the vote and then vote again, it would be in valid, assuming someone caught it. I guess it all depends on if anyone is paying attention.

And I guess the reason the constitution states Senate is to apply to midterms, though "regular federal election" would also be accurate.

Right, I suppose, but the issue I had with that is that as I said, if a person voted in the presidential election but not the Senate election, then technically speaking, the person would be counted as having not voted even if he had.  I can't really envision a case where anyone would actually do that, but I thought I'd make the observation anyway.

Actually, I think it has been done before. I don't feel like looking for it, but I think I remember someone doing it, and since the person voted at least for President, they were not *'d.

And if a new voting law passes, the person will have 8 months now, which I guess would be three * before getting deleted.

[Brandon H]

Statute & Resolutions for the Seventeenth Senate has been updated.

The February 2007 Senate Election results have been updated.

The Political Parties list table has been updated.