Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on May 02, 2022, 12:23:30 PM

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on May 02, 2022, 11:59:19 AM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on May 02, 2022, 11:44:38 AM
...but what is the point?  Why not just have the party leaders officially declare that their party backs such-and-such?  Do we need the dog-and-pony show?  "Party leaders, each representing their party caucuses entire and voting their party's seats as a bloc, shall publicly indicate their support for a Talossan of their choice.  Whichsoever candidate has public declarations with a total that represents a majority shall be pronounced the winner by the Secretary of State."

Perhaps I am misunderstanding what the "ranked vote" means?

The idea behind a ranked vote is that you list your preferences in order.  If your first choice doesn't get a majority, then your vote instead is moved to count for the second choice.  And so on with your third choice.

But in this instance, party leaders nominate the only viable candidates, and no one's supposed to defect from their party choice.  So (a) there's no point to a ranked vote, since someone's always going to win on the first ballot based on whoever was chosen by party leaders, and (b) there's no point to a vote at all, since the real decision was made by party leaders when they agreed on a coalition.  The only thing this accomplishes is that it enables defections, which people were just decrying as a terrible thing that never happens (even though they were wrong about that).

How about this for an idea. To me ranked voting would be something similar to the Talossa Music thing. First choice gets 2 points and second choice gets 1 point. That would make it possible (though unlikely) for a secondary candidate to actually win. The current set up really serves no purpose. If people like this idea then they might as well just allow the majority party to name a Seneschal. I mean...what happens if only one party nominates a candidate???

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on May 02, 2022, 11:44:38 AM
...but what is the point?  Why not just have the party leaders officially declare that their party backs such-and-such?  Do we need the dog-and-pony show?  "Party leaders, each representing their party caucuses entire and voting their party's seats as a bloc, shall publicly indicate their support for a Talossan of their choice.  Whichsoever candidate has public declarations with a total that represents a majority shall be pronounced the winner by the Secretary of State."

Perhaps I am misunderstanding what the "ranked vote" means?

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on May 02, 2022, 06:49:40 AM

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on May 02, 2022, 06:16:23 AM
Without more options it basically comes down to which party has the majority so the election becomes a bit of a joke.

If there were more options, it would still be a joke.  The outcome was decided privately last month by the party leaders.  Adding more candidates who are irrelevant won't change that.  We're just pretending that the vote matters.

With more candidates the vote could be divided enough to block the majority.

Quote from: Açafat del Val on May 01, 2022, 11:51:37 PM
I'm happy to be corrected, and happier that someone read it.

For the sake of my ego, this exact current predicament wouldn't exist under my old writing. Moreover, even if it could, I reiterate that the issue is less the Organic section, and more the lack of candidates.

Why or how are people here all up in arms over "having" to pick two, and not mad that they have only two choices?! Surely we should expect more parties than just the TNC and FreeDems, right?

The very fact that people are whining proves how necessary the requirement is. The whole purpose of ranked-choice voting is upturned if MCs can just pop in and say "my party and no one else, kyhxbye". To have an actual... ranked-choice election... you have to... rank your choices. It doesn't seem unreasonable to require two picks. It's two. A whopping two. It's not three or four of five.

I completely agree with your statement that it is sad that no other parties even put forth a candidate. Perhaps there should be something stating that ALL represented parties MUST put forth a candidate? Maybe that would be too harsh as well I don't know. I will be the first to admit that I am a novice at law making and trying to learn on the fly here. Without more options it basically comes down to which party has the majority so the election becomes a bit of a joke.

Quote from: Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM on May 01, 2022, 11:24:26 PM
I'm sorry for the confusion and consternation that erupted in this election. I have asked the UC to interpret this law, but it will likely have to wait until the current election is concluded.

I am interpreting to my best effort the laws as written, as I will continue to do as long as I am allowed to continue in office as Secretary of State. This is by far not an easy job and I hope you all believe that I am doing this with grace, dignity, and fairness.

I want to be clear Txec, I am not in any way blaming you personally, it is the rule as written that I have a problem with. It is to some degree quite vague and it potentially could force MC's to vote for someone they are diametrically opposed to supporting. It would be no different than telling an American democrat that they have to vote for both Joe Biden and Donald Trump who they would likely rather run over with a bus LOL I understand that you are doing your best to make the interpretation and I am curious to hear what the Cort has to say on the subject.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on May 01, 2022, 07:12:40 PM
Well, I am prepared to die in a ditch over the principle that the Cosa is to elect the Seneschal. The good Baron wants to go back to the old days where the King made a judgement call. The monarchy-critical majority won't have that. I'm not sure what other practical alternatives there are. I mean, if a bunch of parties get together and say "we've got 101 seats", the opposition are entitled to say "prove it". Which is what this election process is supposed to be all about.

If we were going for a minimal reform, I would simply say that this whole section:

QuoteNo member of the Cosâ may abstain in the election of a Seneschál, and shall rank on his ballot at least two distinct preferences, which itself shall be made public

should be deleted, because I've never seen the point of banning abstentions in the Seneschal election. (Since people have effectively abstained before, the SoS has simply treated it as "strike 1" for losing-your-seats-for-not-voting purposes.)

But what I would much prefer, however, is that this discussion be combined with this previous discussion, on what happens if we need a new Seneschal between elections. As I've mentioned, I've been down with a mild case of The Pandemic for a week so I haven't had the chance to flesh out my ideas on that - but I think it's the same topic.

I like the between elections approach you put forth and quite honestly I think it would be a great approach even at the beginning of a cycle. 2/3rds majority should really be required for one candidate to be named Seneschal.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on May 01, 2022, 04:10:51 PM
I'm sympathetic to removing the compulsory preferencing aspect, but I'm not in favour of allowing "write-in votes". Cosa elections are between parties and individual MCs act as agents of those parties. Parties should continue to determine who the candidates for Seneschal are.

The election of a Seneschal should probably just be changed to allow the majority party to put their choice in place. Otherwise having an "election" is really just a dog and pony show. The only way to change that without allowing third party or write in votes would be to require the incoming Seneschal to receive a certain percentage of the vote. A simple majority "election" is a farce in this case. I know I don't speak legalese like a lot of the people here but the truth is the truth whether it is in fancy words or simple words. Let me clarify that I have no axe to grind against or in favor of either candidate, I haven't been here long enough or had enough interaction with either to develop any sort of animosity. I just think it is wrong to basically force people from two different parties to "vote" for the other.

I agree with this, I am seriously considering suing over this as it is not clearly stated in the law that only those candidates nominated can receive votes.

Quote from: Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM on May 01, 2022, 12:50:23 PM

Quote from: Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir on May 01, 2022, 12:22:42 PM
I'm not sure the interpretation by the secretary of state is correct, as yes, organic law does say that political parties nominate candidates for the election, and that it is a ranked choice vote, but it doesn't say that MC's can ONLY vote for the candidates presented to the Cosa, it just says, that MC's votes must be ranked choice and vote for at least two candidates, but the law as written, doesn't explicitly state that the only choices for Seneschal are the ones presented by the parties, from what i understand from reading the said laws, Also, if i recall correctly, last time we had the elections of Seneschal, we weren't constrained purely by the choices from the parties.

But yeah, from what i can tell, as the law isnt specific enough, from my own reading there is enough leeway in the law to allow other votes to be cast. And

QuoteNo member of the Cosâ may abstain in the election of a Seneschál, and shall rank on his/her ballot at least two distinct preferences, which itself shall be made public. (54RZ23)

, doesn't specify that we have to vote only for the candidates presented, just that we need to make two distinct choices.

I will respect your decision, although i honestly find the thought of casting my second vote for the other candidate abhorrent and distasteful, in the matter, but i thought id point out these things, and share my thoughts (and explain why i thought as i did) with all anyway.

I respect your views, but unless I'm corrected in my interpretation by a judge, I'm going to continue with what I believe is the plain meaning of the law. The first time we did this only party leaders could be candidates. That was a bigger headache let me tell you.

I believe the simplest way to fix this is to change the rules to allow voting for a single candidate as the current rules basically require people to vote against their own party and the philosophies of said party. Or simply have the party in power name a seneschal because in this case it really is not electing anyone.

I think we need to do something to clarify the Seneschal elections and to allow for write in candidates or conversely limit voters to a single vote particularly when there are only two candidates. It seems painfully obvious who the second choice would be in this event since we are not allowed to vote for only one candidate. Sounds like a rule the United States would come up with to waste time.

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on May 01, 2022, 11:12:28 AM

Quote from: Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM on May 01, 2022, 10:51:06 AM

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on May 01, 2022, 09:15:36 AM
I cast my vote for Brenier Tzaracompadra I assume I can only vote for the listed candidates so that would make my second choice pretty obvious

As per Organic Law, every MC must list his or her first and second choice. Please list a second choice.

First choice Brenier Tzaracompadra
Second choice Ian Plätschisch

Quote from: Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM on May 01, 2022, 10:51:06 AM

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on May 01, 2022, 09:15:36 AM
I cast my vote for Brenier Tzaracompadra I assume I can only vote for the listed candidates so that would make my second choice pretty obvious

As per Organic Law, every MC must list his or her first and second choice. Please list a second choice.

First choice Brenier Tzaracompadra
Second choice Mic'haglh Autófil

Quote from: Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM on May 01, 2022, 10:48:44 AM

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on May 01, 2022, 09:38:25 AM
Could you also confirm this?

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on May 01, 2022, 09:15:36 AM
I cast my vote for Brenier Tzaracompadra I assume I can only vote for the listed candidates so that would make my second choice pretty obvious

So do I have to vote for only the listed candidates or can I "write in" a candidate

Although I can easily infer his meaning, MCs must be specific and name their choices.

I cast my vote for Brenier Tzaracompadra I assume I can only vote for the listed candidates so that would make my second choice pretty obvious

Quote from: Antonio Montagnha, Ed. D. on April 29, 2022, 02:18:21 PM
So many good friends have politely pressured me to begin this sereis since my high school days that I think I will finally have to give it a try.

I hope you enjoy!