Election: City Planner - Page 2

GodKing · August 15, 2002, 14:46

It must have been me!!!!!!

Because I am the one who at the last moment signed up for this race against OPD.

Isn't it nice to have a close election?

Vlad Antlerkov · August 15, 2002, 14:48

I also voted when it opened-- for OPD, if it matters. (I think I was one of the first votes.

)

Panag · August 15, 2002, 16:21

hi ,

may the best one get it

say , what happens when it stays the way it is , ....

repoll

have a nice day

GodKing · August 15, 2002, 17:13

OPD and I have discussed the possibility of a tie. If so, we will most likely go before the court so that some methodology for ties can be worked out. In this situation, we will work together until the courts make a ruling. Also, UnOrthOdOx will no doubt be jumping up and down, honking his big red nose, with joy over the headlines the Gazette will have.

OPD and I are both glad to be having a good, clean, fun and close race.

Thanks for voting.

Vlad - you must be vote #1 or #2, as I had voted #3 and was making my post with the link to the campaign thread when you posted. You will have to figure with Ninot if you realy want to know which one you were....

Kuciwalker · August 15, 2002, 19:14

If it is a tie, the court can't decide who wins. That would be effectively giving them two votes.

Kuciwalker · August 15, 2002, 19:16

Wait a second - OPD doesn't have 51% of the vote!

That was a major flaw in the CoL.

Kramerman · August 15, 2002, 19:18

Quote:

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
As a reporter, I would love to see a tie...

As an ass hole, I would love to see a tie...

Kuciwalker · August 15, 2002, 19:20

It is already a tie by the CoL.

GodKing · August 15, 2002, 19:30

Skywalker (and other who have the same concerns):

Simple majority was the intention of the 51%. That will be interpited as "ye who has the most, wins".

The court was created in the aftermath of the Trip/Ninot election. (Yes, much discussion occured prior to the election, but once the controversy occured, much more was done to rush the creation of the court). The court was created with the intention of resolving conflicts. This election becoming tied would constitute a conflict. Thus, the court, if they agree to hear the case, can make a ruling as the neutral body created to do so.

The people who man our courts are good people. They will not let politics (such as they are in this election) cloud their judgement. However they decide to solve the problem, they will of course have to justify their actions. If they are arbitrary, we will most likely have a cause to let kman try out the impeachment procedures he has been wanting to..... I will obide by whatever decision the court makes (and I suspect OPD will as well after the several conversations/emails we have traded).

I trust the court to come up with a fair and equitable solution, assuming, of course there is a tie AND it goes before them. There is still 2 days left to vote, and many things can happen in that amount of time, particularly as one of those days is saturday, when many people have free time to surf the net.

Kuciwalker · August 15, 2002, 19:33

However, if it is a straight out tie, where both candidates have 50% of the vote, the court should not have the ability to determine the winner. The issue with the Trip-Ninot election is that a large number of noncitizens voted. There is no evidence of that here, so the court has no jurisdiction.

OPD · August 15, 2002, 19:40

Hmmmn.
I thought the elections finished tommorrow.
I can remember some thing about election being from the 12 to the 16th of each month.
If so then I guess the election closes at 1:10 GMT or in 24 and a half hours.

GodKing · August 15, 2002, 19:44

Per Ninots post above, this ends on the 17th. Saturday.

As it started at 20:10 EST (I think that is 25:10 GMT, or as there are only 24 hours, 1:10 GMT on the 18th.... did I do that right?) the poll should close then.

jdd2007 · August 15, 2002, 20:31

why couldnt we have two CPs?

GodKing · August 15, 2002, 21:28

We each have a slightly different adgenda, so there wouldn't be a clearly defined path, leading to confusion, misdirection, etc. etc. etc.

Either way, we have both talked and we will both support each other no matter who wins.

If it is a tie, or even close, we both have forseen the need for some sort of formal guidelines in what to do in this instance. Thus we will most likely be submitting this election before the justices to see if they can come up with guidelines. If they for some reason refuse to hear the case, then I may start a discussion. However, I would avoid starting this sort of thread at this time as it may deter the court from hearing the case, which IMO it should hear. Also, such a thread may predijuce the court the same way newspapers and tv do to RL courts.

Kuciwalker · August 16, 2002, 09:01

I say it again: if there is a straight, 50/50 tie, the Court CANNOT decide the winner. That effectively gives them two votes.

GodKing · August 16, 2002, 09:54

The court cannot arbitrarily say "so and so is the winner because we say so." What the court can do is come up with a procedure for figuring out what to do. For example:

Bob and Bill are running for some position. The election results in a tie. Bob and Bill do not like eachother, and neither of them will compromise.

The court follows the procedures that were set up under GodKing & OPD vs. The People. The court looks at who voted, and discoveres that of the 500 votes, each person had 25 non-citizens vote. If Bill & Bob were no longer tied after discounting non-citizen votes, a winner would be declaired here.

As it is still tied, the courts look at the their next test, say bribery by the candidates or whatever. Then if still tied, the test after that. So on and so on. Eventually, after the first couple of tests, it is highly unlikely that it would still be tied. If so, they can call it a draw and call for either a re-vote, or whatever they view as fair.

I wouldn't look for the courts to appoint someone or just arbitrarily declare someone the winner. What we need is for some procedures to be laid out, with the courts administering (they are the only governmental agency that isn't being elected, and are supposidly neutral), so that when and if there ever is any problems, we know what to do instead of just sitting on our bums saying "I dunno".

jdjdjd · August 16, 2002, 09:54

Skywalker,
GK can correct me if I'm wrong, I think he is talking about the court deciding how to proceed in cases of ties, not for the court to choose a winner.

This in no way represents a court opinion or a decision that the court will hear any such case...I am acting here as a private citizen and have no opinion, just clarifying for skywalker.

OPD · August 16, 2002, 09:59

Quote:

Originally posted by GodKing
The court follows the procedures that were set up under GodKing & OPD vs. The People.

Great does this mean that if we have a tie we'll get a legal precident named after us.

GodKing · August 16, 2002, 10:06

We can hope so!!!!!

Assuming the court agrees to hear it.

UnOrthOdOx · August 16, 2002, 10:12

Well, if no one else will form the opposing side, the court can always find me as a public defendant. I will debate to the best of my abilities regaurdless of my feelings. That is, if the need arises.

That goes for ANY case.

Kuciwalker · August 16, 2002, 10:33

How would you investigate bribery? How would there BE bribery? Except for non-citizen voters and DL's, of whom there are probably none in this election, there's nothing else they can do. If, after discarding non-citizen and DL votes, it's still a tie, the court can't do anything further.

GodKing · August 16, 2002, 10:49

Sky, it was an imaginary, make believe scenario. The court will have to decide what the tests are, and how they are to be administered. THAT is why it is important for the court to look at this situation.

JUST what tests can there be?

HOW would the test be done?

In WHAT order?

That is why the court needs to look into this. And that is all that I am saying.

OPD · August 17, 2002, 09:27

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker
Except for non-citizen voters and DL's, of whom there are probably none in this election,

There's probably a few non-citizen votes in this election but you have to expect that in every poll.

this has to be the closest electin ever now.

jdd2007 · August 17, 2002, 09:57

couldnt GK and OPD split the duties of city planner?

Panag · August 17, 2002, 10:49

hi ,

if the elections results in a tie , we should repoll , with options to abstain , and maybe even a third candidate , ...

have a nice day

Epistax · August 17, 2002, 10:53

hmm. While the court obviously cannot pick a winner in this election in the case of a tie, I recommend simpsons trivia best 3 ottah 5.

If that doesn't go over so well, the tie breaker could be something such as a vote between the other elected officials (I don't even want to think about what happens if every election, or even more than one, is a tie). We can't have a run off because.. well.. there's two of them.

Panag · August 17, 2002, 11:20

hi ,

this issue should be in the COL

have a nice day

OPD · August 17, 2002, 11:42

NAAARRRGH

Kramerman · August 17, 2002, 12:35

Godking takes the lead. Very close, very close indeed...

Kramerman · August 17, 2002, 12:36

Quote:

Originally posted by panag
hi ,

this issue should be in the COL

have a nice day

It is. I believe it is under the implied jurisdiction of the High Court. If this does end in a tie, there shouldnt be much controversy, the court would just form a plan of action and the people will vote on it or something, that is all.