*Important* NCSG 2016 Annual Elections - Voting rules

[Enrique Chaparro]

Please let me recap to see if I understand this mess:
1. "NotA" is now being considered a pseudocandidate' running
against each other candidate,
2. Thus, "none of the above" *does*not* mean "none of the
above" anymore.
That will lead us to a concerning paradox in the Council case.
Let me explain: let's say that the final tally is:
A - 235 votes
B - 221 votes
C - 208 votes
N - 210 votes
"C" is not elected (I assume that a new election must be run in
that case). Now, let's decompose that tally in ('for', 'against',
'neutral') voter intents:
A - 235 'for' - 30 'against'
B - 221 'for' - 180 'against'
C - 208 'for' - 0 against
D - 30 (from A) + 180 (from B) = 210 'for'
The outcome means that the most consensual candidate is left
out, and the two more rejected go in (!!!).
Please excuse me, but this goes beyond the frontiers of the
absurd.

Regards,

Enrique