Lord protector vote is NOT Invalid

the duchess has declared it so but by law it is valid

The counselors who voted were the Lawful counselors at the time of said vote.

Any who moved to Scotland did so AFTER.

The new counselors cannot vote for any counselor who previously placed a vote.

The Duchess is acting in violation of the legal corpus as her nominee did not win.

In fact the councilors resigned while the vote was in progress and could be viewed as manipulation as could this thread. In addition the Duke did not conclude the vote. I believe the Duke presides over the council proceedings not the judge and not the TM.

I believe it to be in the best interests of the present seated council and the citizens of Somerset to revote for the Lord Protector by all present members of the council no matter who wins the vote.
I can not see your objection to a fair and honest vote.

The vote is valid . The law backs this.

The only manipulation is of the Duchess.

Actually ANY counselor can bring a motion to vote just like in HOP

But You ARE correct it WOULD be in the best interests of the seated council as there are few left now that are not of your party as the SNP has basically moved enmasse to avoid being a a part of this political travesty to Somerset citizens any longer

Yes, any councilor can make a proposal but the spokesperson brings it to a vote I believe, in council that would be the Duke.
In fact we have not really stuck to the letter of the law on proposals. The law states:

Art. 3.4.3. : Any council member can make a proposal. This proposal will be put in discussion for two days and must have the word Discussion before it in the topic subject. After two days have passed, if the proposal is considered as a real proposal by the rest of the council, it is then put to vote for two days if the vote is to be cast in the council forum room. For voting in game, the time of the vote will be determined by the IG system.

"If the proposal is considered as a real proposal by the rest of the council"

We seem to overlook this . Just because a proposal is discussed for two days does not mean it automatically goes to vote. It must be "considered a real proposal by the rest of the council"
Not by three or four councilors but the rest of the council. This opens a whole new area and could invalidate several votes.

Art. 1.3.1. : A proposal becomes a law only after it receives the Duke’s ratification.

This is clearly stated and would indicate the Duke makes the determination of when a poll concludes.

You are the one advocating council's full participation in voting and I am only trying to insure that happens. A fair vote that is not called concluded to aquire desired results for one individual regardless who wins.
I have no personal stake in this vote. I nominated Vana so their would be a choice of candidates.
I previously nominated Hypno for the position, supported him and gave him my full endorsement to an unanimous decision but he quit.
I only request a fair and full vote by the present council.

Nowhere does it say the SPOKESPERSON brings it to vote.

at the behest of several HOP counselors who are interested in the politics of Somerset these days and were following the argumentation in the RK forum today before it was removed I have taken the matter with all of the documentation to the Throne.

The people of Somerset deserve what is lawful.

Ellsbeth wrote:

Nowhere does it say the SPOKESPERSON brings it to vote.

at the behest of several HOP counselors who are interested in the politics of Somerset these days and were following the argumentation in the RK forum today before it was removed I have taken the matter with all of the documentation to the Throne.

The people of Somerset deserve what is lawful.

So much for leaving people outside of Somerset out of Somerset business. You change your stance on issues like the wind to suit your own agenda.

The people of Somerset do deserve what is lawful. That is why they deserve a fair vote by the entire sitting council not one you manipulated to suit your own agenda.

Somerset would be better served if you addressed the issues in council instead of your continueing witch hunt.

More than half of each party represented in council presented or made arguments for candidates nominated in the discussion thread. That would to me seem to mean that the discussion had been considered as a real proposal.

The discussion then moved to a vote. Legal councilors voted on it. It seems to me that this topic meets the legal requirement to pass. But admittedly I am no legal expert.

It seems to me if there is any difference of opinion that this council is completely incapable of accomplishing anything. unless we reach consensus then some one will drag up some argument as to why what ever is decided is not the right thing to do and we are back at square one. For Jah's sake a Lord Protector. It is completely meaningless unless something, Jah forbid, happens to Duchess Allikath.

Pass it and let us move on to important business. Such as what we do with an undermanned council, missing Chief Marshals and Mayors, capital projects to support Bristol. These are the business we should be putting our energy towards.

I plan on voting for Counselor Chardonnay; in a revote, you have my word on that! Lets just do it and get it over with. Counselor Chardonnay, will get all the votes I would imagine, and then her, very important position, will be properly ratified.

I thank you for your support again, Lady Budicca! With your vote so generously cast for me, we can now move forward instead of being stuck on this.

As I said in my post on the other forum:

1) I remember the original vote and my impression was always that it was both concluded and valid.

2) When Hypno vacated his council seat he also vacated his position as Lord Protector. Therefore a new vote is required to replace him

I am happy to vote for WHOEVER wants to be Lord Protector. I think it's a good thing if they are from SNP, to create a sense of balance. If it's Chardonnay, that's fine.

Let's have the vote. And let's have some clarity on when votes begin and end, to avoid this kind of dispute in the future.

This matter has been lawfully appealed to the Regent and HRH is in conference with the King on this matter.