January Membership Vote Reset

[CmdrWilkens]

Please vote again, poll has been resubmitted without AcePace but with "None of the Above"

[Knife]

I move that this vote be tabled. I want 'none of the above' in future votes not retroactive in votes that already went through.

[seanrobertson]

I move that this vote be tabled. I want 'none of the above' in future votes not retroactive in votes that already went through.

I seconded that thing; had I not, folks might not be redoing the vote now

As I said in the vote thread, I want Thanas in the Senate. He earned it. I didn't want Thanas's status (however temporarily) "wisked" away from him for the purposes and duration of a revote.

Nonetheless, since the vote was somewhat "tainted" and I was confident Thanas would win a recount, I decided to support the motion. Call it a stand of sorts against the House of Commons' overt abuse of power.

But that's Angry Sean, with two glasses of bourbon and ginger ale in him to boot, talking. You and Publius were quite right, and I think you hit the nail on the head here:

Go vote in the rules update I've proposed durring the current vote and issue at hand to change the problem instead of fighting what has already come to pass.

Moreover, so what if the HoC sent up some facetious nominees? We're all adults; we can recognize when we're being toyed with. And what does the "none of the above" option really do that abstaining doesn't? The former sounds stronger, but does it really make a difference?

Thus, I second your motion to table the revote. I thought it was worth the "principle," but will people remember the motive driving that effort and, more importantly, would a revote with a meaner-sounding "abstain" really speak to the HoC?

In retrospect, I doubt it, but all that's secondary to needlessly punishing Thanas He won the election, fair and square. That there are some questions about lesser aspects of the vote itself should have no bearing on his victory ... no need to throw out the senator with the bathwater!

[Thanas]

I would like to see the whole thing done once and for all. Therefore, I would very much prefer to have this vote go through, no matter the outcome. The way I see it, this thing was badly bungled right from the start and therefore I very much would like to see a "clean" vote. I have no problem with refraining from voting for the duration of the vote, or with getting kicked out if the "none" option carries. That's just the way it goes.

Also, no hard feelings on my part, Sean. I am not blaming you for anything, if I were to blame anyone it would be certain retards in the HoC who thought it a good idea to turn the nomination process into a joke.

[CmdrWilkens]

I move that this vote be tabled. I want 'none of the above' in future votes not retroactive in votes that already went through.

Well then go yell at Bean who requested the revote

No seriously I'm doing this because there was a motion and a second for a re-vote. This is one of those where I am not going to throw my Chancellor glove down and declare things so because they were completed no matter who I think deserves (or doesn't) to be in the Senate.

[Edi]

Fuck redoing this a third time. Time to vote Thanas in and then make sure that any vote in the future that doesn't have the none-option gets automatically invalidated.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Did someone seriously propose that we re-do the vote a third time?

Thanas won the first vote, it was valid, I think the Chancellor, I humbly suggest, should just lock all of these threads and carry on with other, more pertinent business. There was nothing in the rules preventing it from happening as it did, at the time the vote was undertaken.

[Connor MacLeod]

Look. we're past "January" so lets forget the january vote, and put the people in this one in the February vote.

Edit: Note, take out the joke votes, and votes that did not carry adequate proof of the rationale for why they deserve to be senators. If the people proposing a nomination (or seconding it) can't provide examples for which a prospective member si to be judged by, the nomination should be ignored. I'm certainly not going to vote for someone I know nothing about or have nothing to judge them on.

[The Yosemite Bear]

Sounds fair...

[CmdrWilkens]

Look. we're past "January" so lets forget the january vote, and put the people in this one in the February vote.

Edit: Note, take out the joke votes, and votes that did not carry adequate proof of the rationale for why they deserve to be senators. If the people proposing a nomination (or seconding it) can't provide examples for which a prospective member si to be judged by, the nomination should be ignored. I'm certainly not going to vote for someone I know nothing about or have nothing to judge them on.

Monthly votes are always designed to take place the last week of the month before new nominations open up on the 2nd of the following month. If we were to drop January the next vote would take place starting Feb 21st ...or another 18 days from now. Again Thanas has been seated provisionally and given the way the re-vote is headed I see little reason to doubt that he will not be confirmed. We just passed quorum on the vote so its now valid and he is ahead by a bunch.