Randoms with no avatars won't get any votes.
^_^ Thank you!calani
Thank you so much for creating an awesome voting experience for Term 3 Councilor Election. Going by the results of the last election this was a 1000% improvement. I'm glad you came to join us at Starmade
You da Bomb!
That is not a given.
I dont think you understand what we did/they do in the council,we have almost 0 influence on features
I just noted fact that peoples who applied without uploaded an avatar on SM forum did all a low score with no exception, as if they wasn't trustfull or sure. Like if having an avatar was a sign of quality (which is quite unrationnal mind behaviour since upload an avatar take 5 sec and factually means nothing).
Disagree, some prefer to retain some anonymity and blend into the mass of users.
Having anonymity and blending well into a crowd generally makes it hard to win an election.
Explain please.
If a seat opens up due to a resignation/impeachment, it is refilled by the next person in line[as the voting system is STV, the vote can easily be recalculated if a certain canditate does not exist, without simply discarding the votes of their voters].
I have to ask why there was no official announcement about the departure and succession. Criss stated that Schine were to decide on a course of action "over the weekend", but nothing ever followed up.
If I recall correctly, councilor replacement can only happen in the first half or so of a term, as after that the chance of the votes no longer reflecting the will of the voters is too high. However, there is the chance of me remembering this incorrectly, so take this with a grain of salt.
Replacements still need to agree to become councillors, and also sign an NDA, if they do not do so within a certain amount of time, it is safe to assume they are unable or not willing to be councillors, and can thus be also removed from the list of replacement candidates.
If the time between the resignation and the last election is short enough, this can be relatively safely assumed for the majority of voters.
This is false, as one did not climb a ladder if the top has been cut off. Secondly the voter's intend is not skewed, as all voters can rank all candidates. If they did not, and all their ranked candidates are eliminated, they have chosen to no longer influence the election at that point.
Yes, but you still ranked them in the order in which you preferred them over another.
I don't think this has been written out expressly before. I don't count an internal council discussion, an obscure chat log or a livestream as public information.
Reelections. Suspension of activity in the worst case.
"... thus can be removed" and the next lower ranking candidate climbs up a rank - what else would be the point in eliminating them otherwise?
True, but there needs to be agreement or edict what "short enough" means.
This is exactly what happened here. The top has been cut off, and two runners-up got elevated to member status.
On the contrary: If I did not rank them, that would show my express desire to not have them on the council at all instead of them showing up as a last resort. Because I ranked them, the vote counter must assume that I do have an interest in seeing them as councillors, however late in the process.
I think with such a significant change either way, we shouldn't have to gather that information ourselves based on educated guesses, or find it by accident, buried in some thread only marginally related to the topic.
