User talk:Zapptastic/archives/community justice elections

Please do not modify this page's contents. They are archived discussion from Zapptastic's talk page. Please contact Zapptastic on his talk page with any issues. Also, note that topics are listed in reverse chronological order, with the most recent topics at the top of the page. Thank you.

Late Registration?[edit]

Hola, I just registered but now I realize that I should have done so with your approval? Please tell me if I'm doing anything wrongly.Rosa 06:25, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No - you're all good. Originally, the registration deadline had passed, but tonight I realized I would have more time to verify votes, so registration is still open. Your're all good. Later, zappa.jak e (talk) 06:39, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ties[edit]

Hey, I'm wondering what would happen in the event of a tie. A re-election? Chairman chooses? --Osbus 16:21, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinkinging a one-day face-off between the people who tied. Then again, I'm always open to other suggestions. Thanks, zappa.jak e (talk) 05:58, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about a one-day sudden death, with all members of Community Justice (not just the ones who registered to vote) can cast one vote. Whatever method is chosen, it should be quick and voted on by members (as opposed to the officers). (^'-')^ Covington 02:00, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by officers? Otherwise, your idea sounds fine to me, I don't have a problem with it really. It's not official ruling (yet) however, I'll let other people leave me suggestions. If the time comes, we'll see what happens. Thanks, zappa.jak e (talk) 03:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I wasn't clear; the officers are the people who have been elected already (i.e. chief exective, counsillors, chairman) (^'-')^ Covington 03:19, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All appointments were clear, except for a fifth councillor. Becauser reserve election officer TJDay was unable to vote until the end, and because his vote for most positions would not change anything, I have chosen him to tiebreak between the three nominees for the fifth councillor position. The official ruling is located here. Thanks, zappa.jak e (talk) 23:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nominee Suffrage[edit]

Discussion about nominee suffrage has been moved here. -zappa.jak e (talk)

Vote Numbering and Date Stamping[edit]

I have adjusted your election template so that the list of votes for each candidate will be numbered and with the time of vote. If you don't want this to be the case, please just change the template back. DarthVad e r 23:58, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea. Thanks! Later, zappa.jak e (talk) 03:18, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Closing of New Nominations[edit]

BTW, please close new nominations. Computerjoe 's talk 15:03, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! New nominations were closed and elections have begun. Later, zappa.jak e (talk) 03:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bold Statement Links[edit]

Hi, just a quick point, do you think that people should be allowed to have their links to statements in bold, it just seems a little unfair to me, and contarty to the spirit of the organisation (i.e. one of civility and fairness). --Wisd e n17 17:37, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, let me apoligize for my delayed response. I saw your message last night, but was over at a friend's house and couldn't answer. Anyways, I am not 100% positive to what page you are refering, but I am guessing you are talking about the election page. When people go to the polls, they should be informed as to who they are voting for and why. I am not only including some people's statements - every candidate is represented (except for Covington, he hasn't posted a statement yet). About the bolding, the names are only bold because they are all individual headings - and again, everyone's name is the same there. This all seems pretty fair to me, so I'm not sure if we're refering to the same thing. Anyways, please let me know, or, if we are both talking about the same thing, please elaborate your argument, because I very much want the elections to be fair as possible. Thanks, zappa.jak e (talk) 16:18, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate Discussion[edit]

I think it would be a good idea to have discussion about candidates too, not only a vote. --Osbus 22:30, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea. I have no problem with it. If you are looking to me for leadership, I would suggest doing so on the talk pages of each candidate's statement's talk pages. -zappa.jak e (talk) 23:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Secondary Election Staff Suffrage[edit]

Thanks for drawing my attention to the matter of my eligibility for voting. I have posted a comment on the page you mentioned. T. J. Day 04:21, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem man. Thanks for willing to help. See you around, zappa.jak e (talk) 04:24, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]