Board Thread:The Seven Seas Court/@comment-3112181-20160509192650

I'm not sure if I'm legally allowed to do this, but... here we are.

In light of the passing of this law– which rightly restricts the voting privileges of our site, thus saving us from anymore democratically-lopsided mishaps – I'd like to address a certain outcome of its legislation which has become a matter of concern. Namely, the process by which "special" users are exempted from this law.

The whole point is to prevent mishaps like the one from a few days ago. That being said, exemptions to this law should only be granted in the most unique of cases, i.e. someone who has constantly been on chat for weeks yet is not particularly active on the site itself, or perhaps someone who just barely misses the required quotient prior to a major vote. Yet, after one quick perusal at the recent forum activity, one will notice that a substantial number of users have been granted suffrage for very weak reasoning. One in particular stands out: http://gamersfanon.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:401702.

Whilst it is true that Cadet96 has been somewhat active as of late (the key word here is somewhat – he only has 14 mainspace edits over one week, which is far from the required amount), I feel that his exemption was handed out without any seemingly justified reason. And no, " I would like the privilage to vote since all I have seen this community do is  revoke, remove, demote and delete everything." shouldn't qualify as a reason.

The purpose of the law is to curtail the chance of future election frauds. This includes the process of outsiders magically reappearing after months of inactivity and casting a vote that counts as much as the veterans and regular editors. I am not fully convinced that, after just one week of a small handful of   edits and occasional chat appearances, Cadet96 should be considered a full-fledged member of our community with any intention to stay and improve our site; in fact, he's "reasoning" to vote implies just the contrary.

Voting is indeed a privilege, not a right. It is a fundamental principle upon which our site is uniquely based. So I request that the administration reconsider the exemption and ask themselves: has this user truly been granted that privilege?

Kind regards,

Jerry 