Amendment: SE Poll Settings Discussion

[Pandemoniak]

Originally posted by Drogue
I prefer Herc's idea personally. Poll the 2nd option, without multiple votes (you can't have multiple votes in an election, and I see it as an election of SE settings), however, if one option does not get 50+% of the vote (ie. a majority) then there must be another poll between the two highest scoring settings. This way, multiple votes (ie someone who wants Planned or Green) is brought in, by the fact if Green comes third, and Planned second, unless FM has a 50% majority (which a vote for either of the others will be a vote against FM) they can vote for Planned in the run-off. This is how leadership elections are done in the UK, because it's been shown to mean that the candidate (or SE setting) that is most popular (ie it wins in a choice between that and either of the other two individually) it is elected or used. Basically if your 1st choice doesn't get through, you can vote for your 2nd.

This is, both IMO, and amoung voting behaviour theorists in the UK, the most democratic way to do it. If however people want multiple votes (although they do mean that you can vote Planned and Green in the above example, and it is two votes against FM, against having a majority, and thus slightly undemocratic IMHO) then I will post that.

Which do people want?

I have to say that this is as well the way it works in France, though some late results proved this could be quite unefficient, and this is why I favor a multiple vote enabled.

[Drogue]

It can be inefficient, but i think quite often, with only 3 options, we will need only 1 poll to get an absolute majority. As such it is fairer (you cant vote for 2 options, and hence have twice the voting power) and just as efficient. Even when not it's just one extra poll, and thats not too much IMHO. Besides, we're the UNPK, we don't care about efficiency, just pure democracy

[History Guy]

Well, we need a bit of efficiency around the place, otherwise it'll look bad to our workers. My secretary, for instance, may need to send for me a very important message concerning shipments of my (well...TKG helped a bit there...) xenobrew, and instead, she will sit in the hall eating donuts and talking to her boyfriend. Now, when I'll ask her, what's up with your efficiency, she'll say, well, the government conducts polls in the same laxed manner...And there will be one more job-less secretary on Planet. However, my point is, efficiency is necessary. Democracy is a wonderful thing, yes, a glorious thing, everyone should have their word in, but if we end up (Planet forbid) in a national emergency, we simply haven't got too much time to be inefficient. Efficiency is a bad thing, even for a democracry.

However, I suppose in this case it'll have to be, as it seems it is going to pass. My only complaint is the inefficiency, and that is all.

And yes...the xenobanana is a lie! THERE IS NO XENOBANANA.

[Drogue]

Is it that inefficient? It's more efficient than our current system, whereby if ther is no absolute majority, we repoll (or so it seems) and the original one doesn't stand (as per FM I think). It's not a lax manner, just that we sometimes have two polls, for something that isn't done that regularly. Besides, in an emergency, the Director has power without polls, as per the Constitution.