VOTING: The Ranked Choice Constitutional Referendum

[King Txec]

Voting is now open (or will be open in a little while) on the referendum. All citizens may vote either on this thread or they may vote using the database at this link: http://www.talossa.ca/files/ranked_vote.php. You will need your PSC which will be emailed to all citizens shortly.

The options are:

• Option 1: the King of Talossa shall be replaced by an elected Head of State.
• Option 2: the King of Talossa shall share power with a periodically elected Co-prince.
• Option 3: the King of Talossa shall continue to have the political powers granted by the current Organic Law.
• Option 4: the King of Talossa shall have no political powers except in cases of emergency or constitutional crisis.

Please rank/vote for at least TWO options. For example: 1st Choice(rank 1) / 2nd Choice(rank 2) / 3rd Choice(rank 3) / 4th Choice(rank 4) edited by the SoS to clarify that one-option votes are completely acceptable.

The 50 word statements are available at http://www.talossa.ca/files/ranked_vote.php.
Original Hopper thread: https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=317.msg1870#msg1870

Voting will close at 19h30 Talossan Time on January 25 2021.

[xpb]

Voting is now open (or will be open in a little while) on the referendum. All citizens may vote either on this thread or they may vote using the database at this link: http://www.talossa.ca/files/ranked_vote.php. You will need your PSC which will be emailed to all citizens shortly.

The options are:

• Option 1: the King of Talossa shall be replaced by an elected Head of State.
• Option 2: the King of Talossa shall share power with a periodically elected Co-prince.
• Option 3: the King of Talossa shall continue to have the political powers granted by the current Organic Law.
• Option 4: the King of Talossa shall have no political powers except in cases of emergency or constitutional crisis.

Please rank/vote for at least TWO options. For example: 1st Choice(rank 1) / 2nd Choice(rank 2) / 3rd Choice(rank 3) / 4th Choice(rank 4)

The 50 word statements are available at http://www.talossa.ca/files/ranked_vote.php.
Original Hopper thread: https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=317.msg1870#msg1870

Voting will close at 19h30 Talossan Time on February 10, 2021.

Why are citizens forced to vote for options they don't support?  There is no reason why a person can vote for one option or two or three or four as they wish.

My personal vote is public as always:

Option 3: the King of Talossa shall continue to have the political powers granted by the current Organic Law.

It is the only vote I will make on this issue and I shall not rank any other option nor will anyone do so on my behalf.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Voting is now open (or will be open in a little while) on the referendum. All citizens may vote either on this thread or they may vote using the database at this link: http://www.talossa.ca/files/ranked_vote.php. You will need your PSC which will be emailed to all citizens shortly.

The options are:

• Option 1: the King of Talossa shall be replaced by an elected Head of State.
• Option 2: the King of Talossa shall share power with a periodically elected Co-prince.
• Option 3: the King of Talossa shall continue to have the political powers granted by the current Organic Law.
• Option 4: the King of Talossa shall have no political powers except in cases of emergency or constitutional crisis.

Please rank/vote for at least TWO options. For example: 1st Choice(rank 1) / 2nd Choice(rank 2) / 3rd Choice(rank 3) / 4th Choice(rank 4)

The 50 word statements are available at http://www.talossa.ca/files/ranked_vote.php.
Original Hopper thread: https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=317.msg1870#msg1870

Voting will close at 19h30 Talossan Time on February 10, 2021.

Why are citizens forced to vote for options they don't support?  There is no reason why a person can vote for one option or two or three or four as they wish.

My personal vote is public as always:

Option 3: the King of Talossa shall continue to have the political powers granted by the current Organic Law.

It is the only vote I will make on this issue and I shall not rank any other option nor will anyone do so on my behalf.

This does seem to be illegal, since the law clearly states "Ranked Choice Voting shall be conducted in the following manner: ... Voters may rank as many or as few candidates as they please" (Lexh.B.14 and B.14.1).  Nothing in the recent referendum bill contradicts that, so it seems like this should still be the clear legal requirement, especially since the author of the referendum bill explicitly stated that the rules were supposed to be identical to how the Senate elections are conducted.  This also seems like a pretty big problem, since it's likely to significantly affect the results.

[King Txec]

This is ranked choice voting as specified by the law. It is my understanding that voters need to express at least a first choice and a second choice.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

I was careful, when writing the legislation for this referendum, to copy/paste the rules from Senäts elections. So the rules should be exactly the same as for Senäts elections.

[King Txec]

My apologies. I'm not terribly familiar with ranked choice voting so I worded this thread poorly. Voters may of course rank as few or as many as they wish. One-option votes are completely valid.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

My apologies. I'm not terribly familiar with ranked choice voting so I worded this thread poorly. Voters may of course rank as few or as many as they wish. One-option votes are completely valid.

Glad to hear it and that you will be correcting this.  Mistakes happen, particularly with complicated things.

While you're here, I noticed that the Seneschal was soliciting 50-word statements.  The Distain says that this was on your behalf, if I'm reading his response right.  I'd be curious to know more about the coordination taking place behind the scenes, if you wouldn't mind?

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

My apologies. I'm not terribly familiar with ranked choice voting so I worded this thread poorly. Voters may of course rank as few or as many as they wish. One-option votes are completely valid.

Related question that just occurs to me: did all the ballots go out with these instructions on them, too?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

Thanks very much for your prompt attention, esteemed SoS.

Everyone here should chill out and realise that his is Dr Nordselva's first ever public vote and he's flying by the seat of his pants. Administrative errors were inevitable, and they are being fixed. In this situation, the Regent's nasty little innuendos whereby me helping out the various campaigns get their 50 words in becomes a sinister-sounding "co-ordination behind the scenes" are disgraceful and should be withdrawn.

[King Txec]

My apologies. I'm not terribly familiar with ranked choice voting so I worded this thread poorly. Voters may of course rank as few or as many as they wish. One-option votes are completely valid.

Related question that just occurs to me: did all the ballots go out with these instructions on them, too?

We will be sending out new ballots shortly.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

D:na Seneschal: ike I said, mistakes happen. It has been a previous practice to publish election rules ahead of time, and that might be a good thing to start doing again. Elections are really complicated and additional eyes on the process helps.

As to your efforts in helping conduct the referendum, it's pretty unusual. I'm not aware of the Seneschal ever issuing 24-hour demands for statements to put on the ballot. It is actually extremely unusual for the government to involve itself in the administration of an election at all, for extremely obvious reasons. I'm not accusing you or insinuating anything. Because there was no public discussion of this at all, it must have been private. I would like to hear more about this private coordination and what it entailed, because again it's extremely unusual.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

My apologies. I'm not terribly familiar with ranked choice voting so I worded this thread poorly. Voters may of course rank as few or as many as they wish. One-option votes are completely valid.

Related question that just occurs to me: did all the ballots go out with these instructions on them, too?

We will be sending out new ballots shortly.

Sounds good :-)

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

For those interested, the discussion re: the 50 word statements went like this:

ME: "Here's the Option 1 50 words. You should put them all on a page on talossa.com."
THE SOS: "I haven't got Option 2 and 3's 50 words."
ME: "FREAKIN' YIPES!"

... and it was all sorted out in less than a day. Amazing enough that me doing my best to make sure the Status Quo and Dual Monarchy options got their statement on the ballot is being spun by the Regent into something shameful and corrupt.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

For those interested, the discussion re: the 50 word statements went like this:

ME: "Here's the Option 1 50 words. You should put them all on a page on talossa.com."
THE SOS: "I haven't got Option 2 and 3's 50 words."
ME: "FREAKIN' YIPES!"

... and it was all sorted out in less than a day. Amazing enough that me doing my best to make sure the Status Quo and Dual Monarchy options got their statement on the ballot is being spun by the Regent into something shameful and corrupt.

D:na Seneschal, the Government does not conduct elections.  It seems deeply problematic for the Government to work in private with the Chancery to coordinate such things.  I hope it didn't go any farther and I hope that it doesn't happen again, because it's deeply inappropriate.

I am not insinuating anything: I am saying outright that it is wrong for the Government to privately coordinate with the Chancery and help administer an election.  Txec might be your close friend, and it might be trivial to reach out on Facebook and ask about this, and then help him.  And it might seem innocent to you, but it's not.  Please don't do it again.

[King Txec]

D:na Seneschal: ike I said, mistakes happen. It has been a previous practice to publish election rules ahead of time, and that might be a good thing to start doing again. Elections are really complicated and additional eyes on the process helps.

As to your efforts in helping conduct the referendum, it's pretty unusual. I'm not aware of the Seneschal ever issuing 24-hour demands for statements to put on the ballot. It is actually extremely unusual for the government to involve itself in the administration of an election at all, for extremely obvious reasons. I'm not accusing you or insinuating anything. Because there was no public discussion of this at all, it must have been private. I would like to hear more about this private coordination and what it entailed, because again it's extremely unusual.

There were a couple failures on my part. First, I didn't get started on this as soon as I should have owing to being on vacation the past 3 weeks and focusing on that instead of Talossa. Second, I also didn't realize until literally the last moment that only 1 of the 50 word statements were ready so while I was focusing on working with MPF on getting this up and running, Miestra asked for the remaining 50 word statements. We already had started this election late because neither myself nor MPF realized we had to create it from scratch owing to the way the database is set up. That is it. No collusion. Thanks for assuming I'm doing things under-handed.

[King Txec]

For those interested, the discussion re: the 50 word statements went like this:

ME: "Here's the Option 1 50 words. You should put them all on a page on talossa.com."
THE SOS: "I haven't got Option 2 and 3's 50 words."
ME: "FREAKIN' YIPES!"

... and it was all sorted out in less than a day. Amazing enough that me doing my best to make sure the Status Quo and Dual Monarchy options got their statement on the ballot is being spun by the Regent into something shameful and corrupt.

D:na Seneschal, the Government does not conduct elections.  It seems deeply problematic for the Government to work in private with the Chancery to coordinate such things.  I hope it didn't go any farther and I hope that it doesn't happen again, because it's deeply inappropriate.

I am not insinuating anything: I am saying outright that it is wrong for the Government to privately coordinate with the Chancery and help administer an election.  Txec might be your close friend, and it might be trivial to reach out on Facebook and ask about this, and then help him.  And it might seem innocent to you, but it's not.  Please don't do it again.

You're right. The government is not conducting this election. I am and I own the mistakes made. My next election will go smoother as there is far more precedent for a normal Cosa election than a referendum mid-Cosa.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

D:na Seneschal: ike I said, mistakes happen. It has been a previous practice to publish election rules ahead of time, and that might be a good thing to start doing again. Elections are really complicated and additional eyes on the process helps.

As to your efforts in helping conduct the referendum, it's pretty unusual. I'm not aware of the Seneschal ever issuing 24-hour demands for statements to put on the ballot. It is actually extremely unusual for the government to involve itself in the administration of an election at all, for extremely obvious reasons. I'm not accusing you or insinuating anything. Because there was no public discussion of this at all, it must have been private. I would like to hear more about this private coordination and what it entailed, because again it's extremely unusual.

There were a couple failures on my part. First, I didn't get started on this as soon as I should have owing to being on vacation the past 3 weeks and focusing on that instead of Talossa. Second, I also didn't realize until literally the last moment that only 1 of the 50 word statements were ready so while I was focusing on working with MPF on getting this up and running, Miestra asked for the remaining 50 word statements. We already had started this election late because neither myself nor MPF realized we had to create it from scratch owing to the way the database is set up. That is it. No collusion. Thanks for assuming I'm doing things under-handed.

I'm not assuming anything. The Seneschal has confirmed that she privately reached out to you to assist in administering the election by soliciting and passing on 50 word statements. That is a known fact. I am saying that it is wrong and should not happen again, especially not in private. It sounds like it was pretty minor and not at all corrupt, which is good, but that doesn't make it a good idea. I just want to confirm explicitly that this was the exclusive extent of the coordination between your office and hers?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

I utterly disagree with the Regent's political theory that there must be a Chinese Wall between the Government and the Chancery, and I challenge him to provide any law or precedent saying there must be so. If he's accusing me of "rigging it" in some way, let him come out and say so.

By the way, the Ministry of STUFF is working very closely with the Chancery on the question of integrating the Database, Wittenberg and talossa.com. I'll leave it to Senator Grischün to add the details, but if the Regent is going to set his hair on fire and declare it illegal and/or corrupt, then we should find out now.

---

On another issue, I must take some kind of blame for the confusion re: this referendum. My bill establishing the referendum left a lot of details out of the law, because - when written - I assumed the SoS would "fill in the gaps" with established practice. It was my failing to understand that the SoS, being brand new to the job, would not know what established practice was, and "guess" to some degree. One of those holes was exactly who was to provide the 50 word statements for each option - which ended up being entirely improvised. So I dropped Dr Nordselva in it, to some extent, and I want to apologise fro that.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I utterly disagree with the Regent's political theory that there must be a Chinese Wall between the Government and the Chancery, and I challenge him to provide any law or precedent saying there must be so. If he's accusing me of "rigging it" in some way, let him come out and say so.

The law says pretty clearly that the Chancery conducts elections. I guess I can look up the citations if you want?

It's surprising that you're apparently eager to defend the idea that you have the legal authority to help conduct elections.

[King Txec]

For heavens sake. The ONLY person running this election is myself, with the help of my duly appointed deputy MPF. The Seneschal reminded me of it. She has no access to anything else. Hell, even I don't have full access to the database and I am the Secretary of State. We should move on.