Talk:Mayor of Malton/2010/Election

Predictions

Total :

123 Votes, 6 invalid votes.

Alex Stroke

1 votes (1%)

Barhah Party - Jorm

12 votes (10%)

Example Party - Yonnua Koponen and Thadeous Oakley

5 votes (4%)

Great Blob Party - The Chilean Blob represented by High Priest Summeroff

13 votes (11%)

Green Peace Party - Imthatguy and Lithedarkangel

5 votes (4%)

"Hell Yeah, it's the 80s" Party - Sage Carr

5 votes (4%)

Humanative Party - Misanthropy and Revenant

24 Votes (20%)

Maltonian Separatist Party - Oidar

5 votes (4%)

Popsicle Pete Party - Popsicle Pete

4 vote (3%)

Thermonuclear Party - Sam 2334

4 vote (3%)

Voter Apathy Party - Red Hawk One

5 votes (4%)

Zombiecratic Party (Incumbent) - KyleStyle

39 Votes (32%)

--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 13:50, 22 June 2010 (BST)

Alex Stroke - 1 Vote So we're allowed to vote for ourselves? Oidar 14:21, 22 June 2010 (BST)

You know, it would be more ironic if the Voter Apathy party had zero votes. -- » JS talk contribs » 18:21, 22 June 2010 (BST)

Apt. It would be more apt. It would actually be less ironic if RHO decided not to vote for himself. 20:38, 23 June 2010 (BST)

Frankly, I don't think he'll come back to vote. I see some random person turning up at the last minute and randomly voting for him. But yes, we can vote for ourselves, as per my vote. (Also Mis' and just about everyone else's)--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:23, 22 June 2010 (BST)

Looking optimistic on the number of voters.--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 18:46, 22 June 2010 (BST)

There were 214 in the last election.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:06, 22 June 2010 (BST)

Yeah but times change :( --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 19:07, 22 June 2010 (BST)

It has come to my attention that one Blob Priest is worth 50 zombies. The Blob asks the votes of his priests, children and supporters count as such. Regards, --Dr summeroff 20:16, 23 June 2010 (BST)

What about this guy, then? 20:37, 23 June 2010 (BST)

Surely as a Crat, my vote is worthless? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 20:42, 23 June 2010 (BST)

Party Sub Pages

I'm interested in seeing the creation of subpages for each politcal party, and think it would be cool to have a political set of advisors similar to congress, or parlament, implemented too... -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 03:15, 24 June 2010 (BST)

Mayors rank many many many steps below either of those things. 03:33, 24 June 2010 (BST)

Well I understand that. But you still have a city council, and board of trustees, and whatnot. I'd love to see something along those lines. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 04:00, 24 June 2010 (BST)

Ah, Asshattery.

It's cute when someone strikes a vote from my section, follows that by making some modifications to the vote-striking text that includes instructions to leave a note about this on the person's talk page, and then doesn't do anything like that at all.

That's some petty shit right there. Funny.--jorm 18:21, 3 July 2010 (BST)

Draw?

Looking at how close the two leading parties are to each other, what would happen in the case of a draw? A run-off ballot only between the leading parties? -- Spiderzed▋ 18:47, 4 July 2010 (BST)

Either that or the two leaders would fuse together.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:48, 4 July 2010 (BST)

	Cheater
	The Humanative Party cheats. Deal with it.

I say we knock out the cheaters. At least until they declare me SecDef. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 18:50, 4 July 2010 (BST)

You already got it. ¬_¬ 18:52, 4 July 2010 (BST)

I just noticed it. In that case...

	Cheater
	The Zombiecratic Party cheats. Deal with it.

--•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 19:10, 4 July 2010 (BST)

Hey! Retract your scandalous imprecations at once! The Harumanitve Party are most certainly "cheaters" – but only within the rules and traditions of the sacred sport of politics. We will do anything we must for the sake of harumanity! ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ

Vote striking, or, "Why do you hate Democracy?"

“	All votes must be cast using a hash (#) and a time-stamped signature (~~~~), meaning the only valid votes must be of the format #~~~~ or #Comment ~~~~. Invalid votes may be struck by any member, though the voter receiving the striking should be notified on their talk page.	”
—The Mayoral Election of 2010, "Voting"

Nowhere in these rules do I see that a member's timestamp cannot be corrected. Wording is may rather than must, and as the timestamp can clearly viewed in the page's edit history, it is my contention that any who oppose this practice are themselves practising disenfranchisement and declaring themselves enemies of even such Democracy as we have on this wiki.

Does anyone wish to contend otherwise? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 14:51, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Ah, go for it. 14:59, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Personally I think it's just a better practice to mimic the rather simple laws we have on, say, policy discussion votes and suggestion votes, but I'm beyond fighting you if you'd like to have this changed. I'd recommend waiting/seeking Yon's approval, or any others who have the main organisational responsibility of this page. --

 

 

 

 

15:26, 5 July 2010 (BST)

I have always done it there, too, and never been warned before now. I am being consistent. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 16:05, 5 July 2010 (BST)

I don't know why you're waiting for me, Mis made this page and wrote the rules. It's technically his jurisdiction. Any resemblance of influence I have ends on the advertising page.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:45, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Really? My mistake. Going ahead with full permission. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 19:21, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Post-Election Discussion

--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 01:06, 6 July 2010 (BST)

Your guess on the number of voters was pretty accurate.--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 19:19, 6 July 2010 (BST)

I have only one thing to say about this election: I for one welcome our new overlords. All hail Revenant and that other guy! Oidar 19:55, 6 July 2010 (BST)