View Topic

Hello everyone, I'll go ahead and mention all the UH members.

@Coco Bandicoot
@Mathyland
@Crushita
@BraveSirRobin

As the last election showed, there is a bit of a.... oversight in the nomination process. I just want to get the ball rolling and see if there is a solution we can all come up with before the next election. Since this is evidently a matter that would concern our monarch, I will invite him to share his opinion and expertise with us. I'm aware he does not require an invite, I just thought it would be prudent to ask his opinion as well.

@Wintermoot

Does anyone have any ideas regarding this that we should discuss?

I don't think much has to change except for officially putting the decision to extend the nomination period at the digression of the monarch.

I concur with Mathy.  Though it would be rather dramatic and fun in a political sense to have the extension of the nomination process at the discretion of the Underhusen.  But putting it in the hands of the Monarch is much more pragmatic and far more realistic. 

Agreed.  He is the one after all that runs the nominations and elections, so he should have the final say on extensions.

I personally think that an extension by the Monarch at his discretion would be best. So should we write something to that effect or wait for all the UH members to chime in?

The only one who hasn't spoken is @Crushita, and I have a feeling that his thoughts are going to be similar...given his response in the nominations.

In that case, since the majority of us seem to be in agreement, how should we proceed?

I don't know...I think having someone wanting to join to make the election competitive after nominations have closed was an anomaly. I think usually if we don't get enough people after five days, we aren't likely to on the sixth or seventh either.

But this is something that needs to be addressed. An anomaly and an unlikely scenario but if we find ourselves in the same place again, as unlikely as that is, it would be nice if the precedent you set was codified into law.

Indeed!  Laws always exist for those really strange and unlikely scenarios!!

The only reason it was an anomaly was because nominations were never officially closed (as in the thread was never locked...let alone updated) and the candidates weren't formally announced as the new UH.

In instances like that, I think if someone jumps in wanting to take part, it should be up to the Monarch's discretion as to allow them, as was the case this last election.

However,  I think once voting begins, the nomination thread is closed, and/or the candidates have been announced as a walkover once the nomination deadline has hit, then it should be a bit more airtight.

The only exception is if the Monarch knows the deadline has hit for nominations and chooses to extend it right there.  He's the Monarch, so like I said...he should get the final say when it comes to extensions.  But I also think that, again, once an official announcement has been made regarding the candidates or voting has already started, then it shouldn't be allowed.

So we should probably just write that into law. Since the whole bill-writing thing isn't my strong suit anyone want to take a crack at it?

We really should be getting to work on this, guys.

Agreed.  Though for now I'm letting you guys do the bill writing (while I handle the deadlines and whatnot ).  @Mathyland has already written a few and did a fine job in writing them, and I'd love to see some bills written up by people who have never done it before so they can get the experience doing so.

I was about to start writing this up since nobody else wanted to, but I then realized that I couldn't find where in the laws it states how long Underhusen nomination periods and election periods are. @Wintermoot?