@amWhy I wasn't clueless, I just wasn't sure if the questionnaire is what you were referring to due to the way you were describing the voting. I thought we'd reached a place where we had understood each other, and then I told you that our process has changed because of how we built the questionnaire responses into the election page itself, rather than doing it on Meta.
If what gave the impression I was clueless was a lack of MSE link, here you go.
Viewing the /election page on a site where there is currently no election, e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/election/ shows a list of past elections:
However, the same page on a site where there is an ongoing election, e.g. https://math.stackexchange.com/election/ shows the current election:
...
It's possible to get to the election history: just add a number higher than the number of elections of a non-existing election to the URL, e.g.:
https://math.stackexchange.com/election/9
https://math.stackexchange.com/election/0
https://math.stackexchange.com/election/-1 even works.
(thanks @...
@MartinR The different is that the election here is active - in normal times the link is the historical record. Old elections can still be accessed by going to <site>/election/number, for example the 2020 election is at .../election/8.
@JNat Yes, we did reach that place; and I'm sorry for what may have confused you. Until I located the questionnaire from last year, it was difficult for me to explain know precisely whether it was a meta meta math question, or part of the election page. No problem; I appreciate your patience. I was sort of left feeling like I was seen as crazy, until we figured it out.
@amWhy I was never seeing you as crazy, just got the impression we were maybe struggling to communicate with a shared language, which led to me not being entirely sure of what you might be referring to, until we finally got each other
I strongly request, and insist, on the sort of math.meta post @Asaf asked, following the election of 2017. I think potential nominees need far more information about what self-nomination entails, prior to nominating, because two of four candidates have ceased interacting the day of self nomination, and two days after self nominations, respectively.
@JNat Again, thanks for not dismissing me altogether! :-)
@amWhy Over at RPG we had a candidate who hasnt logged in since posting their nomination nearly a month ago. They could have won the election, which ended two weeks ago, and they still wouldn't even know it.
I also saw that you pinged me from the nomination/questionnaire page that did not seem constructive to me, but alas, upon arriving there, all comments and answers were deleted.
@ParclyTaxel I'm more interested with what originates from you, when no one is around to suggest there's a problem with that. I've said nothing to you about editing that comment.
@ParclyTaxel That's hardly what I am talking about here. You've written responses to the questionnaire and such, but when users show concern, you flip flopped. You walked back answers to carefully chosen questions, leaving a lot of us wondering what you actually believe, and not what you say when flip flop to please the asker.
I will no longer continue with you at this point, as you repeatedly post, then delete your comments. You asked me questions, I responded. Now, let's move on.
Ok, great - it would be really nice if those were available from the election page, since candidates provided relevant information in them. Currently, there's no way to get to the nominations page from the page you get when you click on "election", and I think that's a shortcoming.
@Pedro Your comment to me was off base. I was curious to learn how interactive a candidate is with other users, as a few mods don't interact well with users. That's not to say they aren't qualified, just that it is important to me (a quite a few others) that a mod can interact with users respectfully. Case in point, @Pedro.
Curious, @Jnat, why the order of the names in the list has changed from during the nomination phase; it could just be a random listing. It sort of looks like it's in the order from earliest nominee, to latest nominee. I'm just curious; that's it.