The SoFA Thread

[Peter]

Bump. Can we get an official word on whether or not StatesRights is counted as an eligible voter?

Sorry, I had no clue that this was a 'controversy'.

*Bangs head on keyboard*

[Emsworth]

Can we get an official word on whether or not StatesRights is counted as an eligible voter?

Sorry, I had no clue that this was a 'controversy'.

*Bangs head on keyboard*

ILV, there was even a Supreme Court case about it while you were away.

Also, there seems to have been a lot of confusion over registration deletions. Someone said that some requests have been granted, and others not granted. Accordingly, I have requested the President to issue an executive order that does not recognize voter deletions; the order has been consequently issued.

[Sam Spade]

Bump. Can we get an official word on whether or not StatesRights is counted as an eligible voter?

Sorry, I had no clue that this was a 'controversy'.

*Bangs head on keyboard*

Incompetence, eh? 

[ilikeverin]

Bump. Can we get an official word on whether or not StatesRights is counted as an eligible voter?

Sorry, I had no clue that this was a 'controversy'.

*Bangs head on keyboard*

I don't follow Southeastern politics

Are you asking to be fired? Siege ordered you to stop accepting deletions.

? 

Ah, sorry, I haven't been in the habit of checking his White House thread, and I just got back from my cabin (again!).  This was one of the first threads I read (as it should be), so I responded without reading the White House thread.  My bad for doing what would be best in most every circumstance

So I reverse my decision; patrick1's registration is still valid.  Though I'll also need to have a talk with Siege about this Executive Order

ILV, there was even a Supreme Court case about it while you were away.

Also, there seems to have been a lot of confusion over registration deletions. Someone said that some requests have been granted, and others not granted. Accordingly, I have requested the President to issue an executive order that does not recognize voter deletions; the order has been consequently issued.

Thanks, this would have been much use to me an hour or so ago (and that's not meant to be cynical sarcasm, I have a clearer understanding of what the heck is happening now )

[Emsworth]

Though I'll also need to have a talk with Siege about this Executive Order

Hmm, I think it makes everything much more clear-cut. Accepting some requests for deletion and not others certainly would not be appropriate. We might as well avoid all controversies by simply waiting for registrations to expire naturally.

[ilikeverin]

Accepting some requests for deletion and not others certainly would not be appropriate.

True, but couldn't we do it the other way?  When was the last time a deletion was not accepted?

Though, I agree, we should have a standard.

[Emsworth]

When was the last time a deletion was not accepted?

I don't even know of deletions being requested; hence, I can't point to instances of them being or not being accepted.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It would create too much confusion. What if (for example) a voter deletes his registration deletion? Or what if a voter deletes a registration, and then reregisters in another state after a little while, in order to avoid the one move per two months rule? And so forth. 

[ilikeverin]

It would create too much confusion. What if (for example) a voter deletes his registration deletion?

Well, people will probably be like 'Oh no ' and quote his deletion if this happened, so there would be a record.  Though this could cause some trouble.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Non-event; the voter registered within two months in a different state, no matter that he was de-registered some time in the mean time.

Anyway, Pete Bell and I are talking right now, so hopefully soon I'll be able to say something more definitive about the Southeastern 'controversy'.

[Emsworth]

Non-event; the voter registered within two months in a different state, no matter that he was de-registered some time in the mean time.

Okay, assume that today I'm in Ohio, and I move to Alaska tomorrow. The day after, I delete my registration, and then reregister in Texas.

[Peter]

For the record, States' de-register request can be found here

[ilikeverin]

Non-event; the voter registered within two months in a different state, no matter that he was de-registered some time in the mean time.

Okay, assume that today I'm in Ohio, and I move to Alaska tomorrow. The day after, I delete my registration, and then reregister in Texas.

Assuming you registered in Ohio on July 4 or earlier, you are still registered in Alaska.  If not, you are registered in Ohio.  See: Josh22

[ilikeverin]

OK, anyway, with regards to the StatesRights stuff, I de-registered him, but Pete Bell counted him as registered for the vote, and redoing that would be too much fuss

However, I'd kindly request that StatesRights 're-register'/'update his registration' so this mess can get sorted out without too many (more) ruffled feathers.

[Ebowed]

Just a correction note for the Secretary:

Robert Goldwater aka Bob, John Ford, and Colin Wixted are marked with asterisks.  They all cast absentee ballots.

[Colin]

Just a correction note for the Secretary:

Robert Goldwater aka Bob, John Ford, and Colin Wixted are marked with asterisks.  They all cast absentee ballots.

Why am I asteriked? You get asterisked if you cast an absentee ballot now?

[ilikeverin]

Ah, sorry.  I'll fix that.

[ilikeverin]

Voter rolls finally updated (and at a good time, too, because later today I'm getting the latest Sims 2 expansion pack )

[Sam Spade]

Now that I finally have a little time again, I'm going to point out the mistakes in the voter rolls. 

1. CARLHAYDEN was a new voter.  When he did not vote in the last election, his registration should have been stricken from the rolls, per Article V, Section 2, Clause 6, which states:

"Any registered voter who fails to vote in elections for four months, and 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. This clause shall not be construed to deny a forum user the right to register anew."

2.  Ted Stevens is not a new voter.  He had been registered a long time ago under the name Spl2.  Link here.

3.  Jtfdem is a new voter, not an asterisked one.  He was registered for the first time on August 12, 2005, therefore he could not legally vote in the August 2005 midterms.  His first time to be eligible to vote is October 2005.  Link here.

4.  Al dissolved the Farmer-Labor party a while ago and made every member an independent.  Why it still exists on the voter rolls makes no sense to me.

5.  Wildcard is no longer an independent.  He is a member of Constitutional Union Party.  Link here.

6.  John F. Kennedy is not a new voter, per Article V, Section 2, Clause 6 mentioned earlier.

7.  Jarrod was a new voter.  When he did not vote in the last election, his registration should have been stricken from the rolls, per Article V, Section 2, Clause 6.

8.  StatesRights is not a new voter.  Please read (yet again) Article V, Section 2, Clause 6.

9.  Lewis Trondheim is in the Social Democratic Party, not in the Lewis party.

10.  If the executive decision is to not taking a person's name off the registration list even if he requests it, then why is J.J.'s name off the registration list.  It should be on there as J.J., PA, ACA, District 2, NE Region, with an asterisk.

[ilikeverin]

Now that I finally have a little time again, I'm going to point out the mistakes in the voter rolls. 

1. CARLHAYDEN was a new voter.  When he did not vote in the last election, his registration should have been stricken from the rolls, per Article V, Section 2, Clause 6, which states:

"Any registered voter who fails to vote in elections for four months, and 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. This clause shall not be construed to deny a forum user the right to register anew."

2.  Ted Stevens is not a new voter.  He had been registered a long time ago under the name Spl2.  Link here.

3.  Jtfdem is a new voter, not an asterisked one.  He was registered for the first time on August 12, 2005, therefore he could not legally vote in the August 2005 midterms.  His first time to be eligible to vote is October 2005.  Link here.

4.  Al dissolved the Farmer-Labor party a while ago and made every member an independent.  Why it still exists on the voter rolls makes no sense to me.

I am keeping them that way until they re-register under a new party.  I remember doing this before, and if you don't like it, tough

(besides, it doesn't really change anything; party registration is the least important registration in Atlasia, it seems, especially as old FL members would become independents)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually, he once made an attempt to register himself in a non-existant state, with a non-existant party.  Obviously, the non-existant state move didn't work, but I'm allowing the non-existant party move.  Since the party name was so long (and the acronym for the name would be so long) I decided to call his party 'Lewis' for purposes of registration.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I believe the de-registration was made before Siege said not to de-register people, and, since Siege did not tell me whether his decision applied retroactively (if he did, I apologise and will fix it), I am keeping the de-registration, unless he decides to re-register himself.  Additionally, I think that applies to some of the 'new' registrations.

Some of the other changes are probably becuase I haven't updated the voter rolls for a week (there have been very few changes ), and others are because Article V, Section 2, Clause 6 being really confusing.  I'm unsure as to why there is a double-standard when it comes to new registrants.

Perhaps one of my Senate friends could either introduce a bill to change this or explain to me why this is so important?

[ilikeverin]

Took care of 1, 2, 3, 5, 7.  6, 8, and 10 are pending until I know whether or not the de-registration policy is retroactive.  4 and 9 are nonissues.

[King]

Can we have some updated voter rolls please?

[ilikeverin]

Can we have some updated voter rolls please?

Not when I'm on my dad's laptop

[King]

Can we have some updated voter rolls please?

Not when I'm on my dad's laptop

For 2 weeks?

[ilikeverin]

Can we have some updated voter rolls please?

Not when I'm on my dad's laptop

For 2 weeks?

What can I say, there's not been that many changes

[Hatman 🍁]

Lewis is recognized by the SDP as being a member. I think he even participated in our convention.

[ilikeverin]

Lewis is recognized by the SDP as being a member. I think he even participated in our convention.

Well then he should keep better track of his party registrations

Anyway, I'll list him as SDP/Lew, is that a good compromise?