Were there going to be May elections?

cavebear · May 1, 2003, 20:45

Just asking out of a vague curiousity. When I mentioned previously I sort of assumed these April ones would carry over due to the slow start, I was told indignantly that elections would be held.

Haven't noticed any. And no, I will not be running for any office. As I said, "vague curiousity".

Ben Kenobi · May 1, 2003, 21:10

I'm not the VP, just a humble citizen.

VP needs to call the election, or else,

cavebear · May 1, 2003, 22:09

That's why I noted with some "interest" that 123John321 was the Vice President. I wondered if he would know he was in charge of elections. (hint, hint, John).

I am surprised that President MWIA was not diligent in his duties to manage the game and did not remind his VP at the proper time to carry out the election duties. Tsk, tsk!

MrWhereItsAt · May 1, 2003, 23:24

Well May elections basically now is one option, but looking back at the save report threads, I start playing the 19th of April. Another idea would be to let this term finish a full month and hold elections about the 16th, in which case nominations could happen about the 12th, and I can do another 4-5 sessions. What d'ya reckon?

BTW I haven't actually seen hide nor hair of 123john for a while. Anyone know if he's active?

EDIT: nm - he just posted that he hadn't got the save again.

CannonFodder · May 2, 2003, 00:24

How about President MWIA and the current Administration remain in charge for the rest of the game? It would do away with those pesky, wasteful elections and move the game forward more quickly. After all, what good are elections anyway?

rjmatsleepers · May 2, 2003, 03:52

Quote:

Originally posted by CannonFodder
How about President MWIA and the current Administration remain in charge for the rest of the game? It would do away with those pesky, wasteful elections and move the game forward more quickly. After all, what good are elections anyway?

I agree. And those polls and screen shots are a waste of time. Why don't we just wait until the president and cabinet tells us that we've won.

Hydey · May 2, 2003, 06:00

yes elections

mrboo123 · May 2, 2003, 08:22

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
Well May elections basically now is one option, but looking back at the save report threads, I start playing the 19th of April. Another idea would be to let this term finish a full month and hold elections about the 16th, in which case nominations could happen about the 12th, and I can do another 4-5 sessions. What d'ya reckon?

BTW I haven't actually seen hide nor hair of 123john for a while. Anyone know if he's active?

EDIT: nm - he just posted that he hadn't got the save again.

Opps, sorry! And I've been here, just no reson to post (until now, Mr. Pres.? should I post elections?)

H Tower · May 2, 2003, 09:29

nah, the new government wouldn't take over until the middle of the month anyways and we'd just have another half month term on our hands again. go through to the end of may with this group, and hopefully people who weren't in government will be excited to have a chance at running for office and actually campaign this time.

War4ever · May 2, 2003, 09:49

yes, let the current admin run another month with proper elections etc etc on time for next month.....

even tho the current admin has shirked some responsibilities

Hydey · May 2, 2003, 09:51

It would have been nice to know before that the last election were for 2 months as the only reason I did not run for something was a 3 day absence in April . Intended to run for may when I was available everyday

atawa · May 2, 2003, 10:18

A valid point Hydey,

What about elections in the middle of May as MWIA suggested?

CannonFodder · May 2, 2003, 10:51

Quote:

Originally posted by War4ever
yes, let the current admin run another month with proper elections etc etc on time for next month.....

even tho the current admin has shirked some responsibilities

Only because I haven't gotten the damned save yet....

ARGHHHHH

Zedd · May 2, 2003, 13:36

Lets have the elections on the 16th as MWIA suggests.
Its still easier than "the first tuesday after the first monday..."

War4ever · May 2, 2003, 16:28

i would agree with the above, would the next term be for 1 month.....

after all the current term could just be from the 16-15 of each month instead of making them "monthly" elections

mrboo123 · May 2, 2003, 17:30

ok, sounds good to me

cavebear · May 2, 2003, 18:36

Middle of each month just feels awkward. How about having the nominations open 15th, election polls up 18th, elections over 21st, new administration takes over on 22nd, and lasts to the end of June? That way, we had two 5-week terms and are back on monthly terms after that.

Bob_Smurf42 · May 2, 2003, 20:25

Quote:

Originally posted by rjmatsleepers

Quote:

Originally posted by CannonFodder
How about President MWIA and the current Administration remain in charge for the rest of the game? It would do away with those pesky, wasteful elections and move the game forward more quickly. After all, what good are elections anyway?

I agree. And those polls and screen shots are a waste of time. Why don't we just wait until the president and cabinet tells us that we've won.

I like cavebear's idea. It seems to work well.

Zedd · May 5, 2003, 11:19

Quote:

Originally posted by cavebear
Middle of each month just feels awkward. How about having the nominations open 15th, election polls up 18th, elections over 21st, new administration takes over on 22nd, and lasts to the end of June? That way, we had two 5-week terms and are back on monthly terms after that.

I would vote for that idea. the first few turns are tedious anyway and with a five week term it really gives time for the administration to see some plans thru and get the game moving along.

James Adams · May 6, 2003, 05:30

Quote:

Originally posted by cavebear
Middle of each month just feels awkward. How about having the nominations open 15th, election polls up 18th, elections over 21st, new administration takes over on 22nd, and lasts to the end of June? That way, we had two 5-week terms and are back on monthly terms after that.

I quite agree, with that but why not have five week terms all time from now!

MrWhereItsAt · May 6, 2003, 07:32

The problem is that a calendar month makes it easy to realise that elections are due, and also we can refer to Terms by their month in office instead of needing to remember the Term number.

Yes, these are small, but there really is no reason to break from tradition and have more than one month as a typical term, except where the President has hashed things up at the start of the term (like ME!)

BTW - the poll is done. The decision is to have the current admin run until the 22nd, with nominations around the 15th, and elections the 18th. Term 2 will run until the end of June, then it's back to normal one month terms.

H Tower · May 6, 2003, 10:52

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
The problem is that a calendar month makes it easy to realise that elections are due, and also we can refer to Terms by their month in office instead of needing to remember the Term number.

Yes, these are small, but there really is no reason to break from tradition and have more than one month as a typical term, except where the President has hashed things up at the start of the term.

you just want to remain in office that much longer

James Adams · May 7, 2003, 04:18

Quote:

Originally posted by H Tower

you just want to remain in office that much longer

Sure, I do!