Public Comment: Various Amendments

[Cormac]

Re: Various Amendments

You're basically hinging the entire election in one person's hands. I'd say just have another run off.

I think the first part is the reason for the second part- they would break a tie in their own favor if they were running, so they can't run- which brings me to the point that the keeper shouldn't be breaking ties in the first place. If one clause causes another clause then the first clause shouldn't be there.

Unless there's another reason why the keeper can't run.

The keeper shouldn't be a candidate for Pharaoh because the Keeper is the administrator of the Pharaoh election, and has a lot of power that could swing the vote one way or another(it may not seem like it, but the power is there).

As for the whole election hinging on one person, that's going to happen any time there is a one vote margin. I don't see the issue. However, if our preferred method is "Runoffs all the way down" that's fine.

For what it's worth, run-offs all the way down aren't my preference. I think we're putting too much faith in people changing their votes to avoid gridlock, or putting faith in turnout being lower in a second or third run-off which will change the outcome of the election and break a tie. I don't think we should rely on people not being stubborn, and I don't like relying on people missing the next run-off or the run-off after that and that being our method for breaking ties. We should want maximum participation in our elections and two or three run-offs discourages that.

Given that the Deshret amended a tie-breaking mechanism into Keeper elections, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that a majority favors a tie-breaking mechanism for Pharaoh as well -- though I would love to see more Councilors commenting on this issue.

I also don't believe the Keeper should be able to run for Pharaoh while administering the election for Pharaoh. It's way too prone to abuse, even with a public vote, and there's no guarantee that voting will continue to be public after the Deshret tackles election legislation.

[Cormac]

What if we get 2/3 for both of the proposed amendments?

I think we should vote on one and if it fails we should vote on the other. Voting on both at the same time is confusing and could be problematic.

I'm also concerned that the formatting for this doesn't follow the format for previous amendments, i.e., the First Amendment to the Procedure Act.

[Lord Ravenclaw]

I'm not sure that voting on two options is a wise thing to do, but it's already at vote so I'll just watch and see the results.