[Chancery] Preparing for the 56th Cosa General Election

[xpb]

No worries!

I am sure some of fine folks in the civil service can assist in matching or adjusting your account to that of the database at http://www.talossa.ca/

[King Txec]

Your name is spelled correctly in the Chancery records.

[Munditenens Tresplet]

Do voters need to put their PSC on their Witt vote? I saw the note that it shouldn't be revealed, but the rules for casting a ballot say that it needs to be included.

[King Txec]

I removed the PSC after I verified it in the database simply to prevent shenanigans. Posting it is fine but I don't need it there forever and I'd like to protect your account.

I also don't really need the PSC on a public forum but I can understand why someone would want to prove they are voting legitimately.

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

Looks like I'm currently the only Maritiimian to have voted. 'ts a bit of a letdown, really.

Tangentially related: The Organic Law only states that after the election is over a final tally is published, but would it be possible to publish the results by province as well when the election is over? Or failing that, announcing which two parties got the most votes and how many? I know that the election has just started two days ago so asking right now is too early, but the province-based results would be very handy for some of my electoral math experiments.

[Eðo Grischun]

@Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM

I see you are removing PSCs from Witt ballots. The following rule needs updated in the election thread:

"4 ) Voters will be able to vote on Wittenberg publicly A single vote thread will be created for casting votes on Wittenberg. If you have received your vote code (PSC), you are requested to cast your vote in that thread WITH your PSC."

[King Txec]

@Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM

I see you are removing PSCs from Witt ballots. The following rule needs updated in the election thread:

"4 ) Voters will be able to vote on Wittenberg publicly A single vote thread will be created for casting votes on Wittenberg. If you have received your vote code (PSC), you are requested to cast your vote in that thread WITH your PSC."

Thanks for pointing this out. Much of the overall rules were copy/pasted from previous elections. There is nothing wrong with using the PSC as a new one is generated with each election. I just feel it is useful if I remove the PSC after verifying for security.

[Munditenens Tresplet]

@Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM

I see you are removing PSCs from Witt ballots. The following rule needs updated in the election thread:

"4 ) Voters will be able to vote on Wittenberg publicly A single vote thread will be created for casting votes on Wittenberg. If you have received your vote code (PSC), you are requested to cast your vote in that thread WITH your PSC."

Thanks for pointing this out. Much of the overall rules were copy/pasted from previous elections. There is nothing wrong with using the PSC as a new one is generated with each election. I just feel it is useful if I remove the PSC after verifying for security.

I agree, I just wanted to make sure I was following the rules. Given we use the PSC to reset passwords on the database, I think it's probably best if this wasn't a rule to begin with...if you as SoS needed more verification of someone voting on Witt for some reason, you could request the PSC by PM.

[King Txec]

@Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM

I see you are removing PSCs from Witt ballots. The following rule needs updated in the election thread:

"4 ) Voters will be able to vote on Wittenberg publicly A single vote thread will be created for casting votes on Wittenberg. If you have received your vote code (PSC), you are requested to cast your vote in that thread WITH your PSC."

Thanks for pointing this out. Much of the overall rules were copy/pasted from previous elections. There is nothing wrong with using the PSC as a new one is generated with each election. I just feel it is useful if I remove the PSC after verifying for security.

I agree, I just wanted to make sure I was following the rules. Given we use the PSC to reset passwords on the database, I think it's probably best if this wasn't a rule to begin with...if you as SoS needed more verification of someone voting on Witt for some reason, you could request the PSC by PM.

I just updated the posted rule. Voters can PM me their PSC if they wish or if I need to further verify.

[Xheneta Britxind]

Just barely got my vote in-- as per the notification, I found it in my spam file.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

I am informed by citizen B. Higgs of Fiova, who is an IT professional, that there is a problem with SSL injection (or something like that?) with the automated Chancery emails, which gets them trashed by Gmail accounts in particular. I see that a majority of those who haven't voted yet have Gmail accounts. It may well be that Gmail spam detection has been "souped up" since the last election; if so, this means that bugs in the National Database (of great venerability) have gotten to the point where they are actively sabotaging Talossan democracy.

If I am part of the next Government, bringing the database into "present time" technically speaking, and integrating it with the National Webspace, will be a matter of very great importance.

(Of course, I have an alternative theory on turnout, and that is that the proliferation of barely-distinguishable centrist parties is just confusing less-active voters. Certainly the most clearly ideologically defined parties, the Free Dems and Balançéu, don't seem to be having turnout problems.)

[King Txec]

I have sent reminders from the Chancery's regular email as well to remind voters of the election and to tell them to check spam if they didn't receive a ballot. I'm doing my level best despite the technical issues to get voters the information they need.

[mpf]

I am informed by citizen B. Higgs of Fiova, who is an IT professional, that there is a problem with SSL injection (or something like that?) with the automated Chancery emails, which gets them trashed by Gmail accounts in particular. I see that a majority of those who haven't voted yet have Gmail accounts. It may well be that Gmail spam detection has been "souped up" since the last election;

Could I get more information? If I do, I might be able to fix it quickly.

[mpf]

And for the record, my wife, daugther and I all have gmail accounts and we got our ballots fine.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Mine went to spam, just like last time.

I think that It is possible that voters are simply too confused to vote and choose an option, although that strikes me as an optimistic assessment that also has the benefit of completely excusing the incumbent Government from any responsibility. But on the other hand, it might be true! There are two joke parties and not a lot of information about most of them. It seems more likely that people have just become less interested in the country for any number of possible reasons, though.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

I am informed by citizen B. Higgs of Fiova, who is an IT professional, that there is a problem with SSL injection (or something like that?) with the automated Chancery emails, which gets them trashed by Gmail accounts in particular. I see that a majority of those who haven't voted yet have Gmail accounts. It may well be that Gmail spam detection has been "souped up" since the last election;

Could I get more information? If I do, I might be able to fix it quickly.

"There's SSL mismatched content on the page, SSL validation breaks partially with this, it'll help delivery if link destinations are all perfect. 🙂" - Brad

[esbornatfiglheu]

NPW has now paid their fee.