ELECTION: Term 3 Minister of Domestic Affairs

[Gilgamensch]

ELECTION: Term 3 Minister of Domestic Affairs

Dear Apolemurians,

this election is to vote for a Minister of Domestic Affairs, who will serve a one month term.

The only person running for this office is MrBaggins.

Therefore the poll will be only a Yes/No/Abstain-poll, with the meaning:

Yes = You want MrBaggins to become a elected Minister of Domestic Affairs
No = You reject MrBaggins as a Minister of Domestic Affairs
Abstain = You don't care.

This poll will expire in 5 days on the 20th February 2003, 14:00 GMT.

In the name of our constitution and the name of our people, Senior Justice Gilgamensch

[MrBaggins]

Although I am uncontested, I still feel I should demonstrate my suitability for office.

Firstly, I am an active CtP2DG participant. I usually am able to attend turn chats and have no reason to think that I will not in the future.

In terms of domestic policy, I am primarily concerned with defense and scientific development. As we are at war, I pledge to carefully consider the needs of the Ministry of Defense, to provide for their tactical requirements.

Although I feel that I have a firm understanding of the needs of our nation, I will, naturally poll the will of the people to determine their desires, regarding the importantant decisions ahead.

Finally, as a gesture of friendship towards the APP, I intend to, in the event of my election, have Tamerlin as a delegate.

MrBaggins

[mapfi]

Well, I think the nominations for this election would need clarification by the court but I can't file a case.

I'm sure that Mr Baggins would do a very good job here but I'd rather see the contested election - that's why I vote no.

[MrBaggins]

Firstly... Zaphod filed the nomination too late... in violation of nomination rules.

Secondly, the nomination of Tamerlin was not done in person, in violation of nomination rules.

If you have a problem with the nominations, you should take it up with the court, and have them issue a ruling before voting.

[mapfi]

Well, I can't.

Even if this election is legal, we still have someone who'd also run for this position and I'd like to see that race - that's what will happen if this election gets voted no - so that's why I did what I said. - it's nothing personal

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

could gilgamensch and mr baggins please explain, why they want to cheat on this election? the nomination of comrade tamerlin has been posted at 11:57 today. the period ended at 12:00. the corresponding thread was closed by the poll even more than an hour later.

i can understand mr baggins, who has already some experience with rigged elections, as you might see, if having a look at the wp-chairman-election-thread, doesn't understand or value democracy. but i can't believe a judge is helping him in doing this. if gilgamensch won't close this poll and open a correct one during the next 24 hours, the app will have to impeach him. its a shame those people try to turn our young democracy into a military dictature.

[MrBaggins]

The nominations should have ended at 15-02-2003 10:38... which would be 3 days... but anyway...

Tamerlin did not announce his candidacy.

He is required to do so by the constitution.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

as clearly stated by gilgamensch as response to a request of mine, the nominations should have ended at 12:00 gmt.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

furthermore, the candidacy of tamerlin has been expressed publicitly by a release of the app, which has been posted by the press bureau of the app in the nomination thread, as well as being sent by the same bureau via pm to the wellknown journalist gilgamensch. interestingly the lemurian herald has not yet published or reacted to this press release. of course, the question arises, if the editor of that newspaper is willingly hiding information from the populace.

[MrBaggins]

Political parties are not recognised in the constitution.

Heresay (a published account) isn't recognised.

A candidate has to announce his own candidacy, as clearly stated in the constitution.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

the con says a candidate has to express his candidacy, it doesn't say, that can't be done by a press information of his party!

[MrBaggins]

A lack of evidence of something (in the constitution) is not tacit proof.

To recognise the validity of political parties... and their announcements... we'd need to ammend the constitution.

MrBaggins

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

we would need to ammend the constitution to achieve what you are falsely declare as a fact: that a person can only speak through posts which where posted from his personal account

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

in addition it is quite interesting to see, that you try to argument your opponent out of the election with made up juristic tricks. puts your democratic attitude quite under question.

[MrBaggins]

I believe that the constitution is our first concern in such decision making. It is you that is trying to twist it to suit your purposes.

(e) At the start of the election process, the Court must start a nomination thread. All citizens who wish to be candidates for an office must publicly express their nomination in this thread. For this they have three days.

There is no mention of third party nominations... and certainly no mention of political party nominations.