Are you refusing the request for independent assessment?
I agree, there should be Independent assessment because I want to see what an independent assessment see in the rejected ballots. What I am so mad about the situation is that our ballots are getting rejected for ranking the candidates, while we can do that for PM, it makes no sense!!! Thatās why everyone didnāt probably read the instructions because they probably voted for PM first and thought it was the same thing, Thatās why their should be a same format for every election and for every single elected position, if their was the same format we wouldnāt be having this argument, itās really that simple, people have already made suggestions on how this can be fixed, and I hope they will be taken seriously.
Judging by how it went last time, we can probably talk at length about what voting system(s) to adopt, but in my opinion the venue where that would be changed would be via the Assembly.
Specifically relating to this Delegate election, on the point of releasing ballots ā given one that looks like this:
1 | Griffindor
2 | RON
How are folks proposing that be interpreted?
Independent assessment of what? What kind of ballot are you expecting that doesnāt look like what Pronoun already shared?
I got rejected from formatting like that. This is how the PM ballot works, why not Delegate, it would make elections a lot more easier to have the same format, their should be no reason why to be rejected for just ranking the candidates for delegate. Itās not that hard to interpret, #1 would be who they want most want as delegate, and the second one being their last choice as delegate, itās simple.
There is: Delegate elections donāt work that way so a ranked ballot is invalid.
Itās not that simple. In the current format of Delegate elections, you choose who you cast your vote for.
When you format it like this, what do you mean?
- Do you vote for Griffindor and RON?
- Do you only vote for Griffindor?
I read the Elections Act, to try to get clarification about the ballot, and I think I understand what your trying to say @Silva, and @KrisKringle, about the ranking of the ballot for Delegate.
If folks are interested, here is the proposal (and ensuing debate) that I made after the last Delegate election. It would to address this problem by shifting to IRV for both elections. I would support reconsidering this idea.
Thank you, @Welly!
@Welly, I do support reconsidering the idea, as I think that what was I was trying to say, but saying it a lot more poorly, I will fully support reconsidering that amendment as it will like said, decrease confusion.
I guess theoretically we should start a new thread under the grave-digging rules⦠I will do so.
Agreed
Any vote returned in that format would be counted in the UK under the principle of inclusion. Example sixteen in the UKEC guidance is a direct parallel and addresses the interpretation of ballots marked as if IRV was in use where a correct ballot should only show a single X.
What I am trying to determine is whether there is a problem with our laws, or with the way that Kris is applying them. It looks like it is the later.