CZ Talk:Referenda (Citizen-Initiated)/Election of unopposed candidates, December 2011

Election for unopposed candidates

I'm happy to support this referendum, but I do have concerns about the system. It has been pointed out that under our current rules, or these ones, a group of individuals could join CZ with the intention only of electing each other to various official rules and "taking over". Our user base is so small that a handful of individuals could outvote it if working together, so I think a major revision of what is meant by "good standing" is needed, as well as a way to recall ineffective officials, especially considering how much time has been allocated in the past by the councils wishing to choose their membership. David Finn 09:26, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Your concern certainly seems a possibility, but it seems less likely if this referendum were not enacted. If the single candidate still had to receive a majority of votes to take the seat, wouldn't that lessen the possibility of your scenerio? D. Matt Innis 02:24, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I said under our current rules or these ones. I meant that in my opinion these rules are useful but should be supplemented by additional rules restricting the vote to those who contribute. John Stephenson has just highlighted on the forum the extreme danger of not doing so. David Finn 11:31, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

According the Charter the MC has to decide who may vote (Art.30,4) and who may be candidate (Art.27). Unfortunately, the MC has neglected to do this. It is the purpose of (my) Referendum 2 to remove the reasons for this one. --Peter Schmitt 21:30, 14 December 2011 (UTC)