Howdy there!

With Kurn's departure I'm going to make a new OP on this subject so we can make more centralized edits to the bill about DM campaigning. I've tried to keep it substantially the same, with a few edits for clarity and conciseness, as well as Seraph's proposal about other candidates' campaigns. So for starters, I'm going to propose the following amendment to the Elections Act:
 

Elections Act
An act establishing elections for office

...

2. Electoral System

...

(5) Private campaigns. Campaigns conducted via telegram, private message, or any other form of private communication (hereinafter "private campaign messages") shall be subject to the following regulations:
a. Candidates must disclose the content of all private campaign messages on the forum within 24 hours of the first message being sent.
b. Any alterations to the campaign message must also be disclosed.
c. Private message campaigns shall not be conducted within 24 hours of the closing of the polls.
d. If further conversation about the candidacy takes place, that must also be disclosed.
e. The first private campaign message a candidate sends to each individual user shall include the names of all others the candidate is running against and links to their campaign threads.

 

Criminal Code

An act laying out crimes against the Coalition and their punishments

1. Crimes

...

(14) Illegal private messaging campaigns shall be defined as any private messaging campaign that does not follow the regulations outlined in section 2.5 of the Elections Act.

 
Witchcraft and Sorcery

---

Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense. Formerly many things in other regions. Defender. Ideologue. he/they.

(This post was last modified: 05-27-2019, 10:09 PM by Bzerneleg.)

Reply

omg we have 3 different threads on dm campaigning now oof

Midwesterner. Political nerd. Chipotle enthusiast. 
Minister of Culture of the South Pacific // Former Prime Minister

Reply

Yeah well, I guess we really do want to do something about it

I didn’t really wasn’t sure whether a new thread was best but I figured it would be easier to manage the legislation from an OP as opposed to continually figuring it out from a post in another thread. It appears that Kurn has left TSP so I made some edits and resubmitted.

 
Witchcraft and Sorcery

---

Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense. Formerly many things in other regions. Defender. Ideologue. he/they.

Reply

This looks fine overall. However, I do have a question regarding the amendment to the Criminal Code. Is it advisable to use references in laws or is that too cumbersome for the average reader?

Reply

What is the justification for requiring candidates to disclose the private messages before they have sent them? Is there any issue if it were changed so that the candidate had to disclose the messages within 24 hours after sending them? It would still be transparent but that way a person is not required to plan their campaigning 24 hours in advance. I feel this change would lower the imposition on candidates while maintaining comparable transparency. I am, however, interested to hear other people's thoughts.

Does 5(d) require that a candidate may not send answers to replys from their private campaign messages, rather having to post them in a public forum? If so, I disagree. That is far too onerous. I could perhaps agree with having to disclose something like: "As a result from the campaign message John Smith, Mary Citizen, and Joe Blow engaged in further conversation about my candidacy."

I cannot agree with 5(e) in its current form. I could possibly agree that campaign messages should contain a link to the official list of candidates, but having to link to the actual campaigns would be far too high of a burden for candidates. However, I am not sure if I would support any formulation of 5(e), as it seems very overbearing.

Former Associate Justice of the High Court of the South Pacific (4 December 2019 to 5 February 2021)

(This post was last modified: 04-15-2019, 04:13 AM by Nat.)

Reply

This looks fine overall. However, I do have a question regarding the amendment to the Criminal Code. Is it advisable to use references in laws or is that too cumbersome for the average reader?

I think we could do that. I just sort of went with the specific reference since there are multiple regulations and I didn't know how better to fit it into a single sentence. I could try to update it in a future post. If you have suggestions for how you might better encompass the regulations I am all ears. This is just a draft that is based on the things that Kurn originally wrote.
 

What is the justification for requiring candidates to disclose the private messages before they have sent them? Is there any issue if it were changed so that the candidate had to disclose the messages within 24 hours after sending them? It would still be transparent but that way a person is not required to plan their campaigning 24 hours in advance. I feel this change would lower the imposition on candidates while maintaining comparable transparency. I am, however, interested to hear other people's thoughts.

Honestly I actually kind of agree with you here. I think it's kind of silly to require a candidate to disclose their message 24 hours before they send one. I've run quite a few campaigns in my career and a lot of the stuff I do spontaneously, especially when it comes to telegramming specific people.
 

Does 5(d) require that a candidate may not send answers to replys from their private campaign messages, rather having to post them in a public forum? If so, I disagree. That is far too onerous. I could perhaps agree with having to disclose something like: "As a result from the campaign message John Smith, Mary Citizen, and Joe Blow engaged in further conversation about my candidacy."
 

Likewise agree here. I think this could be grouped into the above requirement. I want transparency but I don't want to completely regulate DM campaigning out of existence. My position is that it is annoying in its current form but it can be made better. What I'm looking for out of this is equality of information access. DM campaigning shouldn't create an unequal playing field based on distortion of facts and withholding of knowledge that other candidates exist.
 

I cannot agree with 5(e) in its current form. I could possibly agree that campaign messages should contain a link to the official list of candidates, but having to link to the actual campaigns would be far too high of a burden for candidates. However, I am not sure if I would support any formulation of 5(e), as it seems very overbearing.

Disagree here. I don't think it's much of a stretch to have the initial contact message (the "hi here's who i am, i'm running for so and so position, here's why you should vote for me, also these are the other candidates running so you can make an informed decision) is too overbearing. In fact, I think it's a better expression of our democracy if our campaigns are more focused on getting out the vote and less on distorting the messages of others for our own political gain.

Based on the answers above, would the assembly be amenable to the following edits to the original proposal?

(5) Private campaigns. Campaigns conducted via telegram, private message, or any other form of private communication (hereinafter "private campaign messages") shall be subject to the following regulations:
a. Candidates must disclose the content of all private campaign messages on the forum at least 24 hours before the first message is sent. This requirement shall be waived if all other candidates running for the same position acknowledge the message. within 24 hours of the first message being sent. 
b. Any alterations to the campaign message must also be disclosed.
c. Private message campaigns shall not be conducted within 24 hours of the closing of the polls.
d. Answers of further inquiries and/or persuasion attempts must be conducted on a platform open to all candidates. If further conversation about the candidacy takes place, that must also be disclosed.
e. All private campaign messages The first private campaign message a candidate sends to any individual user shall include the names of all others the candidate is running against and links to their campaign threads.

 
Witchcraft and Sorcery

---

Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense. Formerly many things in other regions. Defender. Ideologue. he/they.

Reply

This looks fine overall. However, I do have a question regarding the amendment to the Criminal Code. Is it advisable to use references in laws or is that too cumbersome for the average reader?

I think we could do that. I just sort of went with the specific reference since there are multiple regulations and I didn't know how better to fit it into a single sentence. I could try to update it in a future post. If you have suggestions for how you might better encompass the regulations I am all ears. This is just a draft that is based on the things that Kurn originally wrote.
 

What is the justification for requiring candidates to disclose the private messages before they have sent them? Is there any issue if it were changed so that the candidate had to disclose the messages within 24 hours after sending them? It would still be transparent but that way a person is not required to plan their campaigning 24 hours in advance. I feel this change would lower the imposition on candidates while maintaining comparable transparency. I am, however, interested to hear other people's thoughts.

Honestly I actually kind of agree with you here. I think it's kind of silly to require a candidate to disclose their message 24 hours before they send one. I've run quite a few campaigns in my career and a lot of the stuff I do spontaneously, especially when it comes to telegramming specific people.
 

Does 5(d) require that a candidate may not send answers to replys from their private campaign messages, rather having to post them in a public forum? If so, I disagree. That is far too onerous. I could perhaps agree with having to disclose something like: "As a result from the campaign message John Smith, Mary Citizen, and Joe Blow engaged in further conversation about my candidacy."
 

Likewise agree here. I think this could be grouped into the above requirement. I want transparency but I don't want to completely regulate DM campaigning out of existence. My position is that it is annoying in its current form but it can be made better. What I'm looking for out of this is equality of information access. DM campaigning shouldn't create an unequal playing field based on distortion of facts and withholding of knowledge that other candidates exist.
 

I cannot agree with 5(e) in its current form. I could possibly agree that campaign messages should contain a link to the official list of candidates, but having to link to the actual campaigns would be far too high of a burden for candidates. However, I am not sure if I would support any formulation of 5(e), as it seems very overbearing.

Disagree here. I don't think it's much of a stretch to have the initial contact message (the "hi here's who i am, i'm running for so and so position, here's why you should vote for me, also these are the other candidates running so you can make an informed decision) is too overbearing. In fact, I think it's a better expression of our democracy if our campaigns are more focused on getting out the vote and less on distorting the messages of others for our own political gain.

Based on the answers above, would the assembly be amenable to the following edits to the original proposal?

(5) Private campaigns. Campaigns conducted via telegram, private message, or any other form of private communication (hereinafter "private campaign messages") shall be subject to the following regulations:
a. Candidates must disclose the content of all private campaign messages on the forum at least 24 hours before the first message is sent. This requirement shall be waived if all other candidates running for the same position acknowledge the message. within 24 hours of the first message being sent. 
b. Any alterations to the campaign message must also be disclosed.
c. Private message campaigns shall not be conducted within 24 hours of the closing of the polls.
d. Answers of further inquiries and/or persuasion attempts must be conducted on a platform open to all candidates. If further conversation about the candidacy takes place, that must also be disclosed.
e. All private campaign messages The first private campaign message a candidate sends to any individual user shall include the names of all others the candidate is running against and links to their campaign threads.

I'm with W&S on 5 (e) here. Linking all campaigns isn't *that* hard, and it helps our democratic process.

Midwesterner. Political nerd. Chipotle enthusiast. 
Minister of Culture of the South Pacific // Former Prime Minister

Reply

Thanks W&S for your reply and for considering my suggestions and incorporating some of them into your proposal. I am wondering what additional benefit you see from requiring the candidate to list all others and link to their campaigns compared to just linking to an elections page which provides that information (or the election forum itself). This would decrease the amount of space that is required and reduce the risk that a candidate will accidently forget one candidate from their list. I do not really see what difference it would make to the voter, as it will simply be one additional click that they are required to make in order to access the same information. However, perhaps I have overlooked something in my thinking and so I look forward to your response.

Former Associate Justice of the High Court of the South Pacific (4 December 2019 to 5 February 2021)

Reply

My thought process is that it really isn’t that much effort and it vastly helps the flow of information. It’s not that difficult to link the other campaign threads, often there aren’t more than one or two others running anyway. I’m gonna leave it in there for now and I will update OP with the changes later today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 
Witchcraft and Sorcery

---

Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense. Formerly many things in other regions. Defender. Ideologue. he/they.

Reply

Do we envision these campaigns as being more of advertisements/recruitment drives in the mould of RL emails by campaigns — i.e. 'Jessie needs your support! Sign up now and help elect her to the city council.' — or an evolving discussion about a candidate's policies and how the respondee feels about a certain issue?

Islands, for example, typically begin with, and I am paraphrasing here - 'Hi, what do you think of the election ... who do you want to vote for ... can I suggest you change your vote to Candidate X'.

Reply