Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on August 16, 2026, 03:13:01 PMAs a member of the Talossan Bar, I would like to register a formal protest at the Seneschál's aggressive announcements on this matter.  By far the most likely explanation here is that a citizen who was completely clueless about how the Database works clicked in good faith a link which was supposed to allow them to vote without reading it. Angry growls of you know who you are are likely to discourage cooperation with this investigation.

Everyone knows that I'm not particularly well inclined to the political leader involved, but I had no idea what the PSC at the end of the link entailed. Neither - and this is crucial - did the Secretary of State, who republished the "BREN" mailer on Wittenberg verbatim. And the SoS has just pointed out that there is no longer anything on the ballot which would have indicated it belonged to anyone else. The apparent presumption of the Government that a felony has been convicted will therefore have the effect of casting a shadow on the Chancery itself.

The Kingdom has @Munditenens Tresplet to thank for noticing what happened and telling me.

I second this statement.

You can't just jump to conclusions and assume that the person is a criminal. How do you want to prove that there was malicious intent? How do you even want to get proof of that? This behaviour is eerily similar to that of the Law and Justice party in Poland.

Quick question, what happened with this?

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on July 13, 2026, 08:41:39 AMprobably staying out of politics as I really don't think I am cut out for it

As a member of the Talossan Bar, I would like to register a formal protest at the Seneschál's aggressive announcements on this matter.  By far the most likely explanation here is that a citizen who was completely clueless about how the Database works clicked in good faith a link which was supposed to allow them to vote without reading it. Angry growls of you know who you are are likely to discourage cooperation with this investigation.

Everyone knows that I'm not particularly well inclined to the political leader involved, but I had no idea what the PSC at the end of the link entailed. Neither - and this is crucial - did the Secretary of State, who republished the "BREN" mailer on Wittenberg verbatim. And the SoS has just pointed out that there is no longer anything on the ballot which would have indicated it belonged to anyone else. The apparent presumption of the Government that a felony has been convicted will therefore have the effect of casting a shadow on the Chancery itself.

The Kingdom has @Munditenens Tresplet to thank for noticing what happened and telling me.

Quote from: King Txec on August 16, 2026, 01:50:34 PMThe Clerk of Courts hasn't been in Witt in close to four months.

-Txec R

Yes.  If too much time passes, their job is automatically vacated and they will be replaced.

But also if they don't respond in a timely manner, their deputy can act in their stead (and they can also lose their post without the wait, if His Majesty believes they're not fulfilling their duties).  Maybe this will be the thing that draws them back to activity?

Have to follow the rules, ultimately!

The Clerk of Courts hasn't been in Witt in close to four months.

-Txec R

I don't think it's reasonable to expect either that the offender will, in fact, know who they are, or that they will even see these posts.

After preliminary investigations, a charging instrument has been submitted to the Clerk of Corts.  We have worked with the Chancery to obtain a considerable amount of evidence, and we have further been contacted by people who wished to exclude themselves from the investigation.

It is not too late to come forward if you know something about this or if you want to acknowledge that you perhaps made a mistake.

I wanted to use my party threads to again thank the Secretary of State and the Electoral Commission for invalidating the vote that was made under my name.

I also thank the Government for their statement concerning an investigation into the matter. They will have my full cooperation.

The SoS confirms that the name would not have shown on the ballot so it is conceivable that this was an honest mistake. If that is the case I hope the person who made it will come forward soon.

So, having seen the ballot link in question (without clicking on it myself), my immediate impression was that it was presented in a way that a reasonable person who is unfamiliar with the voting system might perceive to be completely benign. I don't remember if citizens' names are shown on the ballot page after they enter their personal code, but showing someone else's name can easily be dismissed as an error, if it's noticed at all.

Meantime, I think we also need to take account of Breneir's recklessness. He should by this point be familiar with the voting system, and he sent a link he should reasonably have realized was intended for himself only to a public mailing list.

But, look, we're humans and we make mistakes, and I think the best way to handle this incident is to take whatever Organic steps are necessary to deal with the ballot directly, and then discuss what about the system could be changed to make it more resilient against this kind of human error. Luckily, a new Cosă session is starting pretty soon.

I don't think threatening prosecution is productive here.

Unfortunately not, the results will be revealed all at once when the deadline has passed.