+- The South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz)
+-- Forum: Hall of Historical Records (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: Archives (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-141.html)
+---- Forum: Fudgetopia Hall of Government (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-12.html)
+----- Forum: Assembly of the South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-91.html)
+----- Thread: [ACCEPTED] Election Act amendment (/thread-2006.html)
Election Act amendment - sandaoguo - 03-24-2015
I propose the following amendments to the Election Act:
Quote:Article 4 - Election Commission
1. Elections will be run by a member of the forum administration staff, acting as an election commissioner.
2. A designated Election Commissioner may be appointed if all members of the administration staff will be candidates in the given election, or if no administrator is able to be an Election Commissioner.
3. A designated Election Commissioner shall not be considered a member of the forum administration staff, and shall exercise no powers except those which are explicitly delegated to it.
4. The Election Commissioner is responsible for creating appropriate elections threads, verifying nominations, verifying Conflict of Interests disclosures, collecting and counting ballots, and officiating ballot results.
Article 5 - Pre-Election Procedures
1. The day preceding the start of the pre-voting period, the Administration Team must perform a citizenship check, ensuring that all citizens are in compliance with the regulations of the Charter.
These changes are not necessarily meant to be mutually exclusive from other discussions regarding Electoral Commission reform.
RE: Election Act amendment - TAC Saxton - 03-24-2015
And what if the admins "drop the ball" as you have stated elsewhere? We just throw our arms up and say "oh well, let's just ride it out" Since we obviously disagree on how that instance should be handled, perhaps you have a better idea?
Election Act amendment - sandaoguo - 03-24-2015
If Admins drop the ball, then I think our laws should err on the side of those under threat of being disenfranchised.
RE: Election Act amendment - Kris Kringle - 03-24-2015
Considering for all other elections we have successfully performed timely checks, I don't see why this once instance should determine future policy. Let's base our decisions on what is most likely to happen, not on isolated incidents.
RE: Election Act amendment - TAC Saxton - 03-24-2015
GR has said elsewhere that when similar instances have happened they simply look the other way, so this is not an isolated instance.
RE: Election Act amendment - Kris Kringle - 03-24-2015
No, I think his point was that, should this happen again, we should not punish citizens for what is admin's fault.
RE: Election Act amendment - Ryccia - 03-24-2015
All in favour, except Article 5.1
RE: Election Act amendment - TAC Saxton - 03-24-2015
Really? Of all of them, I think Article 5.1 is the most significant part of this amendment.
I still think there needs to be some sort of regulation for ongoing election periods. Not addressing the matter seems unwise and could cause similar issues in the future. We can't expect the admins to get it right EVERY time.
RE: Election Act amendment - Ryccia - 03-24-2015
What if the administration team somehow forgets about a citizen? Or something similar occurs? Although it is very rare that this will happen, that will deprive a forgotten citizen of his or her vote.
Election Act amendment - Hileville - 03-24-2015
Since we moved away from having an actual separate entity for ECs the admins have always dealt with this during elections. Admins have removed citizenship mid-election and discounted votes in the past.