OFFICIAL - United Nations Polling Standards

[Nubclear]

How should polls be conducted? YES, THIS WILL BE A DIRECT-DEMOCRACY-ONE-PERSON-ONE-VOTE POLL!!!!!

Options:

-1 Nation, 1 Vote
-1 Person, 1 Vote
-2 Persons, 1 Vote
-3 Persons, 1 Vote
-4 Persons, 1 Vote
-5 Persons, 1 Vote
-6 Persons, 1 Vote
-7 Persons, 1 Vote
-8 Persons, 1 vote
-9 Persons, 1 Vote
-10 Persons, 1 Vote
-OTHER
-XENOBANANA

[Flubber]

This is a game of 5 nations and rules decisions will impact on them as nations. I find it unsupportable that a majority in population could potentially dictated to the majority of factions

One-person one vote worked fine in the last game and to set up this game but now we are divided into groups with potentially adverse interests. My view is that on any issues that arise, a faction should poll its members and establish a faction position and then the will of the majority of factions should rule. At a practical level, the HIve outnumbers the other factions 2 to 1 and could potentially wield undue influence. ( NOte that I said POTENTIALLY)

[Static Universe]

One person, one vote. This is a meta poll to establish gameplay mechanics. Everyone should have a voice.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Static Universe
One person, one vote. This is a meta poll to establish gameplay mechanics. Everyone should have a voice.

THis poll says nothing about what TYPES of decisions would be subject to the form of decision making.

If you are thinking of the related "timing of turns" poll, that is a perfect example where the will of the "majority" might conflict with the realities of the factions. The majority might support any sort of rule that one or more of the factions would find impractical to meet.

[Snowflake]

Originally posted by Flubber


THis poll says nothing about what TYPES of decisions would be subject to the form of decision making.

If you are thinking of the related "timing of turns" poll, that is a perfect example where the will of the "majority" might conflict with the realities of the factions. The majority might support any sort of rule that one or more of the factions would find impractical to meet.

So far no factions have said anything about any passed rule or to-be-passed rule that they would find impractical to meet. But this is not to say that we should exclude the possibility that this could happen. We could still set up a rule saying that if it is impractical for a faction to meet a certain rule then an exception should be granted. Again this can be and I believe will be passed by the majority.

[Snowflake]

I voted 10 persons, 1 vote. Just to add some flavor and lessen the heat a little bit as I think this may also be the intent of the thread initiator by listing them (just speculation of course).

[Flubber]

Originally posted by HongHu


So far no factions have said anything about any passed rule or to-be-passed rule that they would find impractical to meet. But this is not to say that we should exclude the possibility that this could happen. We could still set up a rule saying that if it is impractical for a faction to meet a certain rule then an exception should be granted. Again this can be and I believe will be passed by the majority.

That would be anarchy. A rule that says rules don't apply if people say they can't comply ??

[Snowflake]

Originally posted by Flubber



That would be anarchy. A rule that says rules don't apply if people say they can't comply ??

That would be quite ironic, isn't it? But what I mean is that when it is "impractical" (as you said), in other words, when they really do want to comply but circumstances have prevented them to.

[Voltaire]

1 person, 1 vote; the prospect of giving every nation an equal vote when they're clearly not equal is preposterous.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by HongHu
I voted 10 persons, 1 vote. Just to add some flavor and lessen the heat a little bit as I think this may also be the intent of the thread initiator by listing them (just speculation of course).

I took it light-heartedly as well.

This whole debate reminds me of debates about the Canadian Senate. Whenever someone from a smaller province proposes a Senate ( like in the U.S.)where each province gets equal represenatation ( for the 10 provinces), the people from the two most populous ( WELL over half the population and control of the lower house because of this) provinces jump and scream that their votes would not be worth as much. The eight smaller provinces scream about having no say.

Since the majority in the populous provinces see themselves as losing out in such a Senate Proposal, the issue NEVER goes far. The majority blissfully goes along seing the system as "FAIR" while the eight provinces all feel like they have no say or no control compared to the wishes of the majority in Central Canada.

[johndmuller]

This poll is a fairly good example of the kind of abuses that this whole polling system can lead to - given the selection of sarcastic choices, it seems that it is a statement rather than a survey. Even as a statement it seems to lack something - for the life of me, I can't be sure whether it is a statement by or about the author .

Whoever creates the poll sets the ballpark for the issue by whatever language they use to describe the situation and more especially, by the selection (and omission) of choices. For example, this poll did not include my earlier suggestion that:

The Official dissent of any two factions to a poll necessitates a by-faction roll call vote requiring a majority of factions to pass the measure.

The previous poll was all absolutes, it didn't formalize any mechanism for pre-approval of extra time like for diplomacy or exceptions for good-faith attempts as in "'Poly ate my upload and then wouldn't let me back on".

Part of the reason I objected to the other poll was that by publishing this as an Official poll Jam was seizing control of the issue by the way he framed the poll and at the same time blessing himself with the title Official. (This official thing may have worked in the prior game, but here it is really only appropriate in our private forums - OR - should the Googster Himsself choose to create a poll.). The fact that turn times were going to be subject to regulation was presupposed just by having a poll - even if we decided not to regulate turn times, the fact that we had this poll meant automatically that we could have regulated them if we had wanted to. For example, if I started a poll to distinguish which among a laundry list of various violations would be, if committed, sufficient to cause a person to be removed from this game, even if I included a "none of the above" option, and it won, I would nevertheless have pretty much established that this psuedo-planetary government could enforce a code of conduct.

Interesting that the people who are role-playing the totalitarian Yang have so quickly embraced the culture of the police state - something similar must be happening with the friends of Sven, that must be why Cap'n Flubber and myself are going with these libertarian and almost anarchist (btw, who says anarchy is bad?) positions (In RL, I am much more amenable to government regulations).

[Snowflake]

Originally posted by johndmuller
This poll is a fairly good example of the kind of abuses that this whole polling system can lead to - given the selection of sarcastic choices, it seems that it is a statement rather than a survey. Even as a statement it seems to lack something - for the life of me, I can't be sure whether it is a statement by or about the author .

Can people not have some fun now? Are we at that serious of a state already?

Part of the reason I objected to the other poll was that by publishing this as an Official poll Jam was seizing control of the issue by the way he framed the poll and at the same time blessing himself with the title Official.

My dear pirate friend, first let me applaude on your keen eyes. Some of us did not give much attention on the word "Official" in the poll titles at all. Maybe if you started out to say that your problem is simply with calling it official, we may not end up with such disparity. (Then again, I could be wrong.) Secondly, let me assure you (as if my assurance counts for anything), that having the word "official" in the title of a poll does not make the poll more official than others. You can make a poll with your laundry list of whatever, and you can add the word "official" in the title, and people can even vote on it. This does not, however, mean that you have somehow established a psuedo-planetary government that would be enforcing some kind of a code of conduct. If there are people who dare to not agree with you and me, let them be prepared for the rage of the demon boil Sealurks that is recently upgraded in the PEACE lab!

On that note, why don't you, my pirate friends, create a poll that includes more appropriate options? You know, at time of a planetary crisis, even priates have a duty in additon to taking care of xenorums.

[Nubclear]

OK, since it's late at night and I'm not in a good mood, so those of you whom have angered me.....Shall meet the wrath of hell

My view is that on any issues that arise, a faction should poll its members and establish a faction position and then the will of the majority of factions should rule.

My view is that this is a load of bunk Say it's a 49/51 vote....By saying "1 faction, 1 vote" you are saying that THAT is when 49 percent of those votes aren't counted anymore. They become MEANINGLESS.

To sum it up: THE MINORITIES VOTES ARE ONLY COUNTED AT A STATE LEVEL, AND NO FARTHER. Hardly democratic

If you are thinking of the related "timing of turns" poll, that is a perfect example where the will of the "majority" might conflict with the realities of the factions. The majority might support any sort of rule that one or more of the factions would find impractical to meet.

Yes! Playing turns when the majority ARENT online will be bending over backwards for the minority, but will slow the game down considerably.

Imagine if all television programing in Calgary was listed under Moscow time. It would be bending over backwards for Moscovian-Candadians, but it would inconveinence the rest of the nation.

THis poll says nothing about what TYPES of decisions would be subject to the form of decision making.

I intended to create this poll for ALL future polls. Because if we become so bogged down that

1. More than half of all DG players aren't online when less than half are
2. We have to create a seperate "United Nations Polling Standards" poll for EVERY TYPE OF SITUATION
3. One person can come up and say "Well, even though the majority said THIS....I say nay." and ties up the entire DG....

Then we are NEVER GOING TO GET DONE

I think this may also be the intent of the thread initiator by listing them

Yes, I listed them because some people are being so whiny. They don't get the outcome they like, so they spew out the "Well, the HIVE or the CONCIOUSNESS can skew the results ANY WAY they'd like!!! Even though GooglieGod says theres no mention of it in the forums.......It's still a mass conspiracy." load of stinky fish. And quite frankly, it's bugged me so much I decided to list these options.

Since the majority in the populous provinces see themselves as losing out in such a Senate Proposal, the issue NEVER goes far. The majority blissfully goes along seing the system as "FAIR" while the eight provinces all feel like they have no say or no control compared to the wishes of the majority in Central Canada.

But, which is worse. The majrotiy blissfully going through or the minority blissfully going through simply because theyre a minority in the country?

And be thankful you don't have the electoral college....Votes aren't counted beyond a state level, and if the "Electoral Slate" of a state doesnt agree with the results......Then it can simply submit new ones

it seems that it is a statement rather than a survey

It's both a statement and a survey. A survey to see what people want, and a statement pointing out how stupid this entire debate really is.

And you are proving my statement correct by casting the "Sinner!!! He can be SARCASTIC, so this poll shall be cast out!!!" spell

The Official dissent of any two factions to a poll necessitates a by-faction roll call vote requiring a majority of factions to pass the measure.

More bogging down. If I can bring a DG to a screeching halt simply by saying MY OPTION wasn't included (while there is an "Other" option), is silly. I feel like I'm debating in the US senate, with all this red tape going on.

Part of the reason I objected to the other poll was that by publishing this as an Official poll Jam was seizing control of the issue by the way he framed the poll and at the same time blessing himself with the title Official.

Yes. So lets post an "unofficial" poll, get a clear vote, then WAIT for googlie to come online, post an OFFICIAL poll, have nearly the same outcome, and then have it go into effect.

That'll really speed things up Right now, your doing a political manuevere where you stall for time. Maybe to change an outcome, or to delay things, or whatnot. Please stop.

Are we at that serious of a state already?

Yes HonghHu. Some people are taking this game WAAAY too seriously. I mean, minorities demanding that they become equal to the majority, beauacracy......This DG is really beginning to resemble real-world politics.

And no offense HongHu, but there is a psychological effect when people see official....They are more likely to click. Therefore it gets more votes, etc and then people expect it to become LAW.
However, if we have to have an unofficial poll and THEN wait for GooglieGod to make an official poll, things will go sooo slow.....

And continuously re-creating polls until everyones options are in is VERY easy to exploit.....

"Well, my option of TASSADAR IS GLORIOUS wasn't included, so I created this poll with the option "

Seriously. We need to create SOME type of government here. We were able to function together as a DG previously....All thats changed is there are more groups. So why is the DG being shaken up so much over something so inconvienient? Yes, when I'm in the minority I want people to listen, but fact is....I'm still in the minority.

Plus, usually people come to me Remember political parties in the last DG? Yep

[The_Progenitors]

::Progenitors: aware that humans : engaging in democratic process............... Dictatorship: closest known human equivalent to: superior Progenitor methods............... Democracy too chaotic. Makes humans: untrustworthy................... Suggest: reconsideration of voting procedures::

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by The_Progenitors
::Progenitors: aware that humans : engaging in democratic process............... Dictatorship: closest known human equivalent to: superior Progenitor methods............... Democracy too chaotic. Makes humans: untrustworthy................... Suggest: reconsideration of voting procedures::

Who are progenitors? I haven't seem them on Planet...