[eUK] Congress Speaker Election(s) - setting the record straight
•
by Darkmantle
Hello eUK,
Right now there is a fairly serious issue going on within Congress, and I personally wanted to let the entire eUK see what is happening. I have written this off my own back as I believe everyone deserves the full truth of the matter, rather than just one side of the story.
This article is not designed to reopen the argument, or cause a fight in the comments. It’s purpose is solely to record what has actually happened.
Clarification
The below covers 2 separate votes. The original Speaker election, and the new vote that SHA started as a "recount". I've updated the article a bit to reflect this.
Original Speaker vote
[*] Viridi opened a Speaker Election vote, clearly stating this would last 48 hours. This is the same format that has been used for every vote in the past.
[*] 48 hours later, the vote ended at 15-13 in favour of Woldy. Due to questions about whether a CP is a Congressman or not, this could make the vote 15-14.
[*] Yigit cast his vote after the vote had ended. This can clearly be seen since it is literally posted afterwards. There has been NO history of counting late votes - once a vote has closed, that’s it.
[*] Wingfield commented saying the election should run until daychange. This is not correct - the procedure has always been 48 hours from when the vote opened. The time not being specified has been the case in every past vote we’ve had, and has never been an issue before now.
[*] Lucy then posted their vote late as well.
[*] SHA then conceded defeat, yet then rescinded his concession, for which there is no set rules or precedent. Usually this means Congress gets to discuss what to do and how to do it.
New "revote"
[*] Instead of calling a new election, with a proper nomination period, he immediately started a “revote” with the same candidates.
[*] SHA himself says “48 hours” on the new vote, not until daychange.
[*] When asking for clarification on late votes, SHA refused to do so.
[*] SHA then assumed what 2 people would vote, counting them both despite the fact they have not actually cast a clear vote either way. (Yigit and Max7 - not their fault though).
[*] SHA then claimed people didn’t vote because Congress bought up a new topic while the voting happened. Despite the fact that has been the case in every other vote in the past.
[*] Woldy indicated he did not wish to take part in this new vote, due to the motivations behind it.
[*] SHA openly called Yigits and Lucys votes late. See above: late votes have never counted.
[*] SHA then said he would be purposely excluding TRS from Congress threads, because we are questioning the validity of the vote and how the procedure should work, calling it spam and bullying. Despite the fact Speakers are supposed to be politically neutral, a point he had made earlier in the discussion.
Proof? Screenshots below.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
an accurate summary of events. trumpleby has no basis to stand on.
Tinpot Machiavelli is at it again I see
Is that your new name?
sick burn bro, you got me
More noise from the noisy party I guess
If you don't like the idea of a clear revote then that's very much on you ^
I am dissapointed in you 🙁
I'd generally bank that disappointment til you become an 'MP' Thompson 😛
Ok maybe I am bit too harsh in my conclusions. My apologies! But I wait for writing the procedure down in some kind of comprehensive law
A fair response I'm happy to back o7
It's recorded on the wiki, I will find you the link 🤠
There is no speaker in congress because the election is illegitimate. Im a sitting member of congress and my vote isn't being counted because the speaker cut the votes off early before his term was over. there was only 28 votes cast before they cut the votes off early and thats not even half of congress members! I called for a revote 3 times and SHA started it after the current one ignored my calls, if spamsciles are gonna oppose it, then I have no choice but to boycott any and all congress actions by the illegitimate speaker.
we don't run votes until day change, we run them for x number of hours, in this case 48.
this isn't a game mechanic vote, this is a vote of confidence run by congress in good faith and rn my confidence in the process is non existent.
Lack of vote updates against the clutter and a lacking a clear cutoff is just bad speakership tbh
28 is actually 70% of Congress members, well over half.... o_O
I meant to say just over half*
Fair. But no vote has ever waited until everyone has voted, nor has it gone until day change.
Every single vote we've had this year has been based on start time. Not day change. And SHA is fully aware of that - in fact his OWN vote is going by those rules.
the random Woldy biscuit contest killed me 😃😃😃 what a legend
I wanted pink wafer to win
Not sure why my name is in the article, I was one of the first three people voting in the Congress Thread after Man Friday and lucy28 once Virdi announced the public vote on National Feed.
Also I made a joke saying 'I vote voted twice..' I don't think Virdi counted both votes.
p.s. it's ashame you haven't mentioned the other people that started right away with other messages that shadowed the Speaker's original vote and jumped from voting for the Speaker to other CP issues that were misinterpreted.
I could just post the entire thread, but I was trying to get the relevant parts.
I mean the new vote that SHA has started. Neither Yigit or yourself has actually said you're voting SHA in this new vote, yet he's counting you both. Which is never how it's worked - we count actual votes, not what we assume people will vote.
The whole list of events is a bit confusing as it seems that me and Yigit started this whole situation..
I might need to clarify that then. Definitely not blaming either of you, at all!
You're only mentioned because SHA is counting a vote that you've yet to cast. While claiming his vote is both fair and democratic. A way to show the hypocrisy in action.
Updated, hopefully clearer now.
Yup, although [*] Lucy then posted their vote late as well. - this is incorrect, lucy28 voted before me in the Congress Thread - why the vote was 'late' ?
You posted your vote 3 days ago. Lucy posted hers yesterday, after Viridi announced the vote closed.
We're talking about the first vote there, not the new one. Will clarify that as well.
Correct, sorry my mistake - Select28 was the second one that voted after Man Friday. I was the 3rd one of the first voters.
.... .....and this is why one must be out of these message boards to have peace and quiet . Its not worth getting caught up in things like this. A president is for one month. Maybe it would help to let the person with the least times as president go for the elections.
I am not TRS party fanatic yet I'm inclined to agree that the "recount" is completely against the procedure. I don't understand why people grip for their seats. It's just a role, why go against the procedure?
Maybe the Congress should clarify and write down its procedures to prevent such problems in the future
Thanks for posting this. Another disgraceful display by SHA, but who’s counting any more.
Day change was an incorrect call by me. The 48 hours was up sometime in the last hour beforehand. The speaker noted that it was around 6pm his time.
All of this is immaterial. It is time to let things settle. That goes for both camps.
On another note, I’m sure that Congress members from all parties would be concerned about screenshots of Congress being made public.
Two things:
Do you abide by your vice presidents behaviour, language and treatment towards myself, you have seen the screenshot and I can make it public if needs be
And Congress is elected by the people, what is your opposition to their views being made public?
I have just published an article covering my take on it all. As to your second point, I do recall many previous objections for all corners about publishing comments from a thread that is not itself public. Wasn't the country feed utilised for the public side of things?
https://www.erepublik.com/en/article/a-call-for-calm1-2773292
You literally don’t answer my first question. Your vice President with a history of abuse, bullying and disgracing the office of vice president, has literally done it again. You haven’t addressed this at all yoive just called for “calm”
Theres supposed to be an official record of all Congress discussions anyway, except where the information is sensitive. That's also why I ddin't just dump the entire thread.
There is one thing that is being consistently stated is that you want SHA's head. What sort of weakling do you take me for? My call for calm applies to my government as well.
Show where I’ve been abusive to SHA. We called off hostilities and have had a good relationship for about two months now. His behaviour last night was unacceptable. I wanted an acknowledgment from you because if you defend the behaviour then that’s not acceptable.
It's disheartening to see such an issue within Congress, but I appreciate your effort to provide transparency and clarify the situation. It's essential for all eUK citizens to have a clear understanding of what's happening.
From the information presented, it does seem like there were some deviations from the established procedures in both the original Speaker vote and the subsequent 'revote.' Clarity and consistency in how votes are conducted are vital to maintain the integrity of the democratic process.
I hope that this situation can be resolved amicably and that Congress can continue its important work in a fair and impartial manner. It's essential for the eUK's political system to function effectively. Let's all work together to find a solution and ensure the smooth operation of Congress in the future.
The correct procedures were followed for the original Speaker vote.
The problems raised regarding it have not raised before. In the past all votes lasted for a certain amount of hours, not until daychange. Late votes have never been counted, and regular updates are not always given by the Speaker.
Yet SHA started an immediate revote, without ANY discussion or nomination period, which goes against the current procedures.
What a mess. I remember when nobody wanted the thankless job and everyone got to hate the speaker with equal measure. Clearly it's being abused if people think the role holds political influence, and by saying this I include people wanting it to ensure it's not a vector of abuse of power - because that amounts to the same thing as wanting to use if for ones own ends - a misunderstanding and disregard of the role.
The only requirement for the speaker is that they are respected by all sides and trusted to be neutral, honoring process before congress, congress before the CP, the CP before the next election. I'm disappointed in SHA for being one of the most knowledgeable respected citizens who's now willing to cash in on this for the sake of a single election for a role he should know better than to covet.