[Cantzelerïă/Chancery] Official 59th Cosâ General Election Results

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Suppose a ballot is cast as follows:

1. Candidate Z
2. Candidate X
3. Candidate Y

This ballot is assigned to Z in the first round. Suppose Z is eliminated; this ballot is then assigned to X, but X is the second preference on this ballot.

Oh, I see!  So when it says "second preference," it only means that by virtue of elimination of first preferences, but never when the first preference is still in play.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Therefore a "second preference assigned to [Candidate X]" means a ballot currently assigned to Candidate X on which Candidate X is the second preference.

So just for clarification, this should really read, "a "second preference assigned to [Candidate X]" means a ballot currently assigned to Candidate Y on which Candidate X is the second preference."  I think you made a typo here and it was confusing to me since you can't have X be second preference below X.

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

Therefore a "second preference assigned to [Candidate X]" means a ballot currently assigned to Candidate X on which Candidate X is the second preference.

So just for clarification, this should really read, "a "second preference assigned to [Candidate X]" means a ballot currently assigned to Candidate Y on which Candidate X is the second preference."  I think you made a typo here and it was confusing to me since you can't have X be second preference below X.

It's not a typo; in the example above, the ballot is assigned to X and X is the second preference.

Clearly this section needs to be rewritten, although I think I'm still correct even under the current wording.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Therefore a "second preference assigned to [Candidate X]" means a ballot currently assigned to Candidate X on which Candidate X is the second preference.

So just for clarification, this should really read, "a "second preference assigned to [Candidate X]" means a ballot currently assigned to Candidate Y on which Candidate X is the second preference."  I think you made a typo here and it was confusing to me since you can't have X be second preference below X.

It's not a typo; in the example above, the ballot is assigned to X and X is the second preference.

Clearly this section needs to be rewritten, although I think I'm still correct even under the current wording.

Oh, yes.  Wow, really hard to shake that misinterpretation.  Like a Magic Eye you can't stop seeing.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I am convinced -- I'd advise @Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB to go with this interpretation.*  It is equally valid in terms of letter of the law, but also conforms to the spirit of the law and leads to the obviously intended outcome.

*Not professional legal advice in my capacity as the sometime counsel for the Chancery or as the Avocat-Xheneral, although if retained in that respect again I would say as much.

[King Txec]

I am convinced -- I'd advise @Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB to go with this interpretation.*  It is equally valid in terms of letter of the law, but also conforms to the spirit of the law and leads to the obviously intended outcome.

*Not professional legal advice in my capacity as the sometime counsel for the Chancery or as the Avocat-Xheneral, although if retained in that respect again I would say as much.

Thank you Baron and S:reu Plätschisch for your opinions in this matter. I will accept your interpretation as it was also my initial interpretation until I "got into the weeds" with the law. Well to be forthright I at first believed there was a tie and the Premieir of Maricopa would have to break the tie, so it was my second interpretation.

I once again strongly urge the incoming Ziu to amend this language so that it is more clear for non-IRV experts.

[King Txec]

I should note that no party received a majority in the Cosa, which means someone will need to hobble together 101 votes for Seneschal as that requires a clear majority. If no Seneschal is chosen by the first day of the 1st Clark, we'll have another IRV situation in voting for Seneschal.

What I am not clear about and cannot find a legal reference is if 100 votes is enough to pass a VoC or not.

[Sir Lüc]

What I am not clear about and cannot find a legal reference is if 100 votes is enough to pass a VoC or not.

Counterintuitively, it is. Normally a tied vote fails, in which case a tied VoC would mean no confidence, but OrgLaw VII.8 states that:

If at the end of any Clark the "no" vote [on the VoC] outnumbers the "yes" vote, the King shall dissolve the Cosa and call new elections.

Bit of an anomaly really, but whatever. I remember this was already the case in the 46th Cosa, btw, when the Government was initially 104-96, but became 101-96-3 when the Liberal Congress was formed.

[King Txec]

Thanks. I was looking for the OrgLaw reference which I knew was there, but couldn't find it.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

Yeah, historical Talossan precedent (see Ár Päts) is that 100 votes is enough to win a VoC

Meanwhile, I agree that the RCV law is broken, and I'm kicking myself that I didn't notice until now. The international standard with RCV - as applied in Fiova, where the law is copy-pasted from that of the Australian Capital Territory - is that if there's a tie, you revert to the result from the previous round.

[King Txec]

I hate to be indecisive but something isn't sitting right with me here. I'm going to seek an advisory opinion from the CpI.

[King Txec]

The Chancery has had time to thoroughly examine all the ballots and apply El.Lex.B.14 to them. Accordingly, upon certification by the Electoral Commission, a tie will exist between Carlus Vilacafat and Txotue Davinescu. Both candidates received 5 first preference votes on the third round of voting. Both candidates also had one valid second preference assigned to them. A fourth round is not possible because the outcome would be exactly the same as the third round.

Summary: Carlus Vilacafat and Txotue Davinescu tied in the Maricopa Senate Election. The Premieir of Maricopa, Danihel Txechescu will be called upon to break the tie.

[King Txec]

The Electoral Commission has certified the results of the election and the results are now final.

Many thanks to the hard work of @Danihel Txechescu, @Ian Plätschisch, and @Istefan Perþonest in this most important task. 




Secretár d'Estat/Secretary of State

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

@Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB It's been three months now, we might want to unsticky this?