Query (Election-ish), What's up with Voter's List?

[Wynna]

I need a little bit more to establish precedent. I have no doubts as to your truthfulness, Fluff, but it's a contentious election and this will either confirm or establish precedent. A name...what election it was to allow me to narrow down the time of it...sumpin. While your word is good enough for me, I'd really like my subjective trust in you to be backed up by objective proof. I'll PM Cassiel, too.

The reason that it's important is that by preference I would not allow voting changes after the nomination period, but by precedent, if already set, I will. We apparently have four days (When did THAT go through and what country was I in at the time?) before the end of the first round of voting to figure it out.

[Hialmar]

I know Arkan (and Iarwain, who had the same problem) has been able to get proxy access to the website, and although viigas has, as yet, not, he's hoping that Iarwain can walk him through the process in the next day or so.

I have contacted the 3 of them through e-mail.

The proxy method should work for viigas too.
However, I'm not sure if I have his current e-mail address in the website database.

Anyway if he is in contact with Iarwain that should be okay.

I'm sorry I haven't thought about proxies when Rusty first talked to me about the problem.

[psycho_leo]

Viigas made a post in the NC forum today, so he's managed acess from somewhere. If it's from work or home you'd have to check with him.

[Rusty]

Viigas has access via proxy.

[fluffmonster]

I need a little bit more to establish precedent. I have no doubts as to your truthfulness, Fluff, but it's a contentious election and this will either confirm or establish precedent. A name...what election it was to allow me to narrow down the time of it...sumpin. While your word is good enough for me, I'd really like my subjective trust in you to be backed up by objective proof. I'll PM Cassiel, too.

Objective proof...so if I just throw any 'ol name out there that will be good enough? That's the thing, isn't it...even if I did recall a name and threw it out, how would you know that to be any different than me making one up? You'd take my word for it? But if you'd take my word for it, why wouldn't you take my word for the precedent? So maybe you'd try to contact the individual for confirmation...would they even remember? Would they even have been told? (it was always the case of someone else making contact on their behalf...I've no recollection of anyone ever contacting me about their own voting). Would you take their word for it?

Not that I'm inclined to argue the point, I just find a certain irony in what is an impossible standard. I should also note that it is technically not for lead admin to make the call, it is for the CC to decide. Oversight of elections is really its only relevant remaining purpose.

And Jayde, *you* are missing the point. Its not about needing people to do the work, of course we need those people. Its also not about whether they should get to vote or not. It is entirely about changing the list in the *middle* of a vote. This damages the integrity of the process no matter the reason. The current debate is exactly about what constitutes the "middle".

Let me lastly go on the record repeating that I think all these elections are a bit much in general. Not trying to defend the system, just indulging my natural cynicism.

[JaydeMoon]

But... isn't the integrity of the system only potentially compromised if those people are allowed to vote? Not simply because they started doing the work of a Staff Head?

[FanaticusIncendi]

All well and good, but...

The work of the PA's office must continue in this critical time in the weeks before we go live regardless of whether there is an election going on or not.

no. No one, even admin, may disregard the requirements of elections. All admin should appreciate the absolute necessity of election integrity both in fact and appearance.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. My meaning was more to say "business as usual" in respect to appointing people. Regardless of what else is going on (election, etc) the work goes on. I am doing my job (much of it behind the scenes) creating a new department (documentation), updating existing departments, getting admissions ready for live, etc. Wynna asked for the documentation to be updated, so I gathered the results from my behind the scenes efforts and updated the paperwork.

My statement was meant merely to point out that the election was not the reason for my appointments.

Hope that helps.

[indio]

Just looks bad guys. Doesn't matter what the technicalities are.

Public list at the time the election is called...it's the only irreproachable way to go about it.

[Cassiel]

Apologies for the delay seeing this. While I was CC lead the voting list here stood as it was at the opening of the nomination period for the duration of that election, with any extra or unexpected votes removed before results were posted. That's partially documented in my post below the list linked above where I said "if you forget to post your new EADM here before an election starts, their vote will not count for that election as the CC will remove it when checking the votes."

Typically I or someone else on the CC would then get in touch with the admin in charge of affected staff so it didn't happen twice - I can't think of specific example off the top of my head, but could probably find them.

The rationale was roughly what's been laid out above, although the particular driver as I remember it was the worst-case scenario of recall votes: we didn't want admins trying to stack the deck after a recall vote had been proposed but before it had started by tweaking their staff etc.

There was where an EADM was unable to vote when I added him manually (this may or may not be what Fluff has in mind) - the situation then was that I knew about it in advance but didn't have necessary access to the user group to change it.

Hope this helps.

[Wynna]

All right, then. As it seems the policy in place is to not change the voter group after nominations are in, the three new staff heads will receive their voting privileges immediately after this election.

[danielmn]

That mean I get to vote?

[Wynna]

No, but you do have my undying thanks for all you've done, and an unquenchable hope that you'll come home to us!

[indio]

Aye to that.

[Teric neDhalir]

That mean I get to vote?

Look! It's danielmnubus! (I really, really couldn't resist). Now come on back, fer chrissakes.

[danielmn]

I've swallowed my pride and found my way back. I won't be as visible on the forums or chat as I have been. At this point, I've come to play, nothing more. I do have building promises to both Teric and Rick, that I am and will be working on. Otherwise, see you all in game.

And yes, you can call me Danielmnubus.