abff08f4813c

It will have to go to court at this point but EC has done nothing wrong in terms of the recount.

Agreed. This isn't the step where the EC did wrong - it was earlier in putting the wrong postal code on the envelope that caused it to be returned.

You make it sound like a conspiracy that they counted more votes for the Liberals.

Not the OP but - I'd agree that this is definitely not the case. It seems to instead be a clear and accidental mistake on the part of whoever handled the printing of the envelope.

Now, while it's definitely troubling if the overall vote can be swung by an "administrative error" of some sort, there's no evidence that this happened more than in this one case. And thus it only matters because the final call was done to having a single vote more for the Liberal candidate.

If it was down to even just two votes for the Liberal candidate instead, getting this lost vote counted would not have changed the results. So definitely not a conspiracy.

They’re doing everything by the book.

I guess the point here is - laws can be changed. Perhaps not retroactively this specific case, but going forward the laws can be updated to better handle situations like this in the future where EC made a mistake.

This is a totally different situation, but when I went to exchange my expired driver's license at Service Ontario, one of the first workers that I saw there made a mistake and incorrectly refused my abstract.

I had to return after a weekend, and spoke with someone else who acknowledged the issue. At this point I was technically outside the 1-year window by a couple of days to be able to perform the exchange - but I wouldn't have been if not for their mistake. Luckily for me, they were empowered to correct it and accept the exchange.

So - is there a compelling reason to avoid granting EC the ability to correct their own mistakes, particularly in a clear-cut situation like this one?

They’re following the law.

Never stated otherwise.

They never saw the vote. They can’t count it,

I get what you're saying, but it's still disturbing that EC can cause a mistake of this nature and not have the ability to rectify it.

Certainly this isn't the worst case of disenfranchisement by Elections Canada (see for example https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/this-is-unacceptable-polling-station-problems-prompt-calls-for-investigation/ )

it has to go to court.

Thinking it over, there's a good counterargument here. Even if EC could directly order a by-election in this case (or even was given the power to just outright count the vote), someone would contest this and it'd likely end up before a judge at some point anyways. So might as well just go direct.

Then make an application to a judge to challenge the result and they will have to count it.

I'm not sure that I'm eligible to do this..

Truly, it should be the BQ that does it. I’m guessing they will in the coming days.

Agreed. This isn't so bad, at least there's a way forward.

Agreed. What an unfortunate finding by EC. As a matter of principle I believe every vote should have a chance to get counted.

Very cool. Can't wait to see this go live.

Right? It's not a difficult concept to understand, not at all.

What's extra unfortunate about this is that in a slightly different set of circumstances (if she had been able to stay in Italy this whole time) she'd now be near the time where she'd qualify for permanent residence

https://italianvisa.it/residence-permits-italy/

Which would have allowed her the ability to live and work in another EU country legally (such as Germany)

https://www.mazzeschi.it/mobility-rights-of-third-country-nationals-in-the-european-union/

I'm not here to second guess her choices, it's just sad to see that she's being deported from a place that she should have been close to obtaining legitimate status in. But I believe that there's a silver lining - correct me if I'm wrong but I believe she's still able to use this pathway.

In other words, she'll be back.

Not AI related, but reminds me of what happened at X when Musk let a bunch of folks quit and then had to beg for some of them to return. This is another example of a poorly thought out boomerang.

That's a really good UX suggestion. Can definitely see how it could be confusing.

So I think the reason it's like that is because the create post page extends the edit post page, which uses the same side panel as everything else.

But looking at it I think we can update the side panel itself at https://codeberg.org/rimu/pyfedi/src/branch/main/app/templates//_side/_pane.html#L9 so it checks something like prev_url or next_url and then dynamically replaces the 'Create post' button with a 'Submit' button instead.

When we did drivers ed in Ontario, our class instructor introduced us to ratehub.ca for this sort of thing - that was for auto but it looks like they let you compare home insurance rates.

Agree 100%

I was having a discussion the other day with someone and it was pointed out that pp grew the number of seats for the CPC and strengthened their position in winning the next election. Thus, unlike Jagmeet Singh of the NDP or Peter Dutton of the centre-right Liberal Party of Australia (who oversaw massive losses in their party) Dutton deserves to win a seat back and remain the leader of the CPC as well as the opposition leader.

Actually, I'm looking for a good, well reasoned counterargument to this (for when I bring it up again tomorrow).

Makes me wonder how they started with Liberal in their name. Perhaps they were liberal from when they formed a hundred years ago and just never updated any of their positions or stances?