Wikipedia:Concordia/Elections/Nominee Suffrage

Ruling

Recently controversy has erupted over nominee's right to vote. Specifically, this involves voting for other positions in their own categories, and also, voting for themselves. Most of this is my fault, for which I take full responsibility. Originally, when I posted ruling regarding voting, I included something saying "Members are welcome and encouraged to register to vote if they will not be casting a vote for any position they are nominated for", via this revision. A while ago, Pureblade asked me if he was allowed to vote for categories in which he was running, via my talk page. That discussion has now been moved to this page. His question could have been easily answered by reading the registration page - however, the information was not on the voting page, so it was a little hard to find. Because he asked that question, I assumed that there was no offical ruling, and, following my personal beliefs, allowed him to do so, even to vote for himself. This was in clear violation of the rules. Because of this, DarthVader changed the voting page to allow people to vote for other candidates in their categories, and to vote for themselves, via this revision (the current revision at the time of writing). Osbus, following the message on my talk page, and the resulting new "rule" on the voting page, changed the registration page, removing the notice disallowing people to vote in their categories. As a result, Xchrisblackx (Mahogany) has voted for someone in his category, as well as Osbus.

Results

No one may vote for other candidates in the category for which they are nominated themselves.
No one may vote for themselves.
All votes that have been cast in violation of rules one and two will be disqualified.
Anyone who has previously violated rules one and two will not face any disciplinary action.
zappa will revert all changes to pages needing to be changed to comply with rules one and two.
Osbus will not face any disciplinary action for changing the template for the registration page, but his changes will be reverted.
DarthVader will not face any disciplinary action for changing the template for the voting page, but his changes will be reverted.

All discussion below this point is unofficial and not to be regarded as election ruling.

From Mahogany's vote for The Great Puffin

This editor cannot vote as he is standing for election. Awaiting election staff ruling. Computerjoe 's talk 17:17, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to zappa.jake, those standing for election can vote for any other editors they choose. - Pureblade | ^Θ 17:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also saw that comment sorry if I broke a rule I was just going by what I saw Mahogany -wanna chat?

Sorry, there used to be a rule stopping you from voting from people standing for the same as you. Computerjoe 's talk 19:31, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There still is per Wikipedia:Community Justice/Elections/Registration. Computerjoe 's talk 19:32, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It strikes me that be voting without knowing the rules you should be disqualified from the election, as you have quite simply broken the rules, which are very clear, and which you are advised to vote only if you are aware of. I personally would suggest that all your votes are removed, and that your nomination is removed. I think this needs to be discussed though with urgency. --Wisd e n17 19:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All votes should be made void, though I object to his nomination being removed. Computerjoe 's talk 20:01, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The voting page makes it clear that you should be aware of the rules, and if, quite simply, you break those rules why should you be allowed to stand for election. It's like any other election: if you break the rules you are disqualified. --Wisd e n17 20:04, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From Osbus' vote for Osbus

Why not, if I'm allowed to :)

Yes but you are not. and following the same logic I mentioned above all your votes should be nullified and your nomiation should be disqualified. --Wisd e n17 20:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why am I not allowed to? It says at the top I am. --Osbus 20:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Community Justice/Elections/Registration. Computerjoe 's talk 20:41, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I think I'll edit the top of this page to not confuse people. --Osbus 20:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well I wouldn't do that as it was DarthVader who changed it in consultation with zappa.jake. Basically who knows what is going on? The election staff have changed the rules after the election's begun! --Wisd e n17 20:52, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then someone should change the registration page...I think I'll do that. --Osbus 20:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am unhappy about this. Computerjoe 's talk 21:07, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which rule applies? Are people allowed to vote for whoever they want or not? I would strongly advise people not to change the rules after the election has begun. If people wanted rules changing, they should have brought it up prior to the election. Can we just decide on which statement is true? - • The Giant Puffin • 21:29, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From zappa's talk page

Are candidates allowed to vote in categories in which they are running? IE, could I vote for councillors other than myself? - Pureblade | ^Θ 23:02, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are allowed to vote just as anyone else. You can cast a vote for yourself if you wish. Later, zappa.jak e (talk) 03:23, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have added this extra information to the voting page template. DarthVad e r 13:25, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two nominees for Concillor, User:Osbus and User:Xchrisblackx, have now voted for other nominees in the Councillor category (in the case of Osbus for himself), which very clearly breaches the electoral rules. Therefore I would suggest that all votes are nullifies of the two nominees, and that furthermore both nominees be disqualified for a very clear breach of electoral rules, which they are expressly told to be conversant in (in nice read text). --Wisd e n17 20:43, 24 April 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Why have the electoral rules been changed after the election has started!? --Wisd e n17 20:43, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let me go check the rules, but I don't believe that they have broken any. Be back in just a minute. -zappa.jak e (talk) 20:56, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Osbus changed the rules here. Election staff did not. Computerjoe 's talk 21:04, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My edits

Sorry about the mix-up, I (like others), thought that I could vote for other Councillor candidates. I hope I havent caused too many problems - • The Giant Puffin • 10:14, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're good. It was really my fault, I am to take the blame here. *gets ready for snowballing pile-on* -zappa.jak e (talk) 04:20, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

lol, ok thanx - • The Giant Puffin • 19:32, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]