The Polling Standards Commission

[punkbass2000]

I think we need polls to be standardized to a certain extent for the purposes of clarity. The following are ideas that I think will help this purpose. Any new ideas, chages to these ideas or opposition is welcome.

1. All polls should be 48 hours minimum. This is to ensure people have reasonable amount of time to see the poll, so there are no 'quick polls' just before a turnchat, preventing the majority of people from voting.

2. Polls should have a separate discussion thread before the poll itself is posted (where appropriate), to allow discussion of the topic and to get an idea of the various necessary poll options.

3. The first post of a poll should be informative only. It should explain the poll and the options. It should not suggest a 'correct' answer.

4. The first post should clearly state all the polls' conditions; i.e. length poll will be open, whether similar options will be aggregated (explained later), how the winner will be selected.

5. The options should be as simplistic as possible, with a 'yes/no' vote, if possible. This helps ensure majorities instead of pluralities. This is to prevent the previously mentioned agregated votes. An aggregated vote is where, for example, there three 'yes + condition' options and two 'no + condition' options, for example. If 7 people vote for each of the 'yes' options, and 10 for each of the 'no' options, this can present a problem. The 'yes' got 21 total votes to the 'no's 20 total votes, but none of the 'yes' votes won.

6. All polls should include an 'abstain' vote, to show how many people have voted that believe in none of the options.

7. All polls should have an 'other - explain below' option, allowing 'write-in' votes.

[Gramphos]

Sounds reasonable, however, I would like to add that if a repoll occurs it should have at least 75% (or any other number) of the voters of the original poll or an absolute number of voters for an option which is bigger then the number of votes of any option in the old poll to be allowed to use for decision making.

Also I think that prediscussions for some polls should be allowed to be skipped on some occations:
A) It's close to the deadline for polls and the poll can't wait longer
B) The options for the poll can be taken directly out of the game, and all options that is possible can be used as polloptions.
C) If it for any reason is important to get a quick view of the opinin before creating a final poll.
In any case if a poll is posted without a prediscussion an explaination on why shall be included in the first post.

And finally short polls: 48 hours is a good length of polls. However, sometimes just a short sight of what people want are needed, and I suggest that 24 hour polls shall be allowed, but their result should only be valid if at least 40% of the members voted in that poll.


All these are just suggestions to both make it harder, and easier to run polls

Oh, and I suggest that POLL rules gets its own section in the Constitution.

[punkbass2000]

One of your suggestions reminded of the idea of having quorums. This would be where a minimum of half of total members would have to vote for poll to count. This does not mean half have to vote in favour, just half have to vote, to ensure a minority can't start passing laws while others aren't around. To clarify, it implemented like this: Hold a vote every so often (once a term, perhaps?) Where the options are 'I vote in polls regularly' and 'I don't vote in polls regularly', or some such. This will help us determine how many active members we have. Say we have 20 active members, the quorum would be 50% of that, 10. For any poll to pass, it must have ten voters. For example, If a poll has 5 'yes' votes, 4 'no' votes and 1 abstainer, the motion carries, because 5 + 4 + 1 >= 10. If there are 9 'yes' votes, 0 'no' votes and 0 abstainers, the motion does not carry, as 9 < 10. I didn't pout this up before because I'm not confident that it is a good idea, but it may as well be up for discussion. MAybe it would be a good idea for cabinet votes, as we will alway know how many department leaders there are.

[punkbass2000]

Originally posted by Gramphos
B) The options for the poll can be taken directly out of the game, and all options that is possible can be used as polloptions

This is what I meant by 'where appropriate'. 3, 4 or 5 billion years, for example, would not need a discussion.

And finally short polls: 48 hours is a good length of polls. However, sometimes just a short sight of what people want are needed, and I suggest that 24 hour polls shall be allowed, but their result should only be valid if at least 40% of the members voted in that poll.

This sounds reasonable, though it may need more than a majority to pass. It should also be made quite clear that the poll is relatively short poll so that the people voting for the proposal know that they're voting in favour of having a shortened poll.

I agree completely with everything else that I didn't respond to.

[Kuciwalker]

Standardisation will only take time; same for the minimun # idea. We've worked fine in the Civ2 Demo Game without them.

[punkbass2000]

I don't think it will work fine. I could start a poll, wait until my prefence is winning, close the poll and have it implemented in the game. There are so many easy ways to railroad the average citizen who can't follow every thread and read every post, we need some way of preventing people os taking advantage of this.

[Gramphos]

Originally posted by punkbass2000
This sounds reasonable, though it may need more than a majority to pass. It should also be made quite clear that the poll is relatively short poll so that the people voting for the proposal know that they're voting in favour of having a shortened poll.

Yes, it must be clearly stated in the first post (or in the title of the question how many days timeout the poll has, and also that the poll only is binding if at least X persons votes, and atleast Y% or the voters vote for the winning option)


Also it should be stated if a Poll is as a guidline, or for a final deciding.

[Gramphos]

Oh, and I think that there should be a thread for each department in whice they link to open polls hosted by them, to keep track of the polls. (Or the Vice Preseident could handle that in one big thread )

[Kuciwalker]

Why don't we just leave it alone? Don't fix what isn't broken. These little things have already been solved by us at the Civ2 Demo Game.

[Gramphos]

Nah, I remember that a few polls are hard to grab. So some rules for polling is good. And the purposed actually gives quite some freedom to the poster. (Just as long as he states what he's going todo in the first post.)

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by punkbass2000
I don't think it will work fine. I could start a poll, wait until my prefence is winning, close the poll and have it implemented in the game. There are so many easy ways to railroad the average citizen who can't follow every thread and read every post, we need some way of preventing people os taking advantage of this.

You can close polls at will???

And, on the one hand aren't you arguing that we're all trustworthy enough to have the save, yet on the other there need to be really strict rules so that poll starters don't delude the ppl?!?!?! Who do you trust in all this?
I no longer know what you mean with your previous posts on things like save availability, strict vs informal "Constitution" etc.

WTF?!?!?!

[Gramphos]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
You can close polls at will???

No, but you cn say that you take the final result in a specific time when it's in your favor.

And, on the one hand aren't you arguing that we're all trustworthy enough to have the save, yet on the other there need to be really strict rules so that poll starters don't delude the ppl?!?!?! Who do you trust in all this?
I no longer know what you mean with your previous posts on things like save availability, strict vs informal "Constitution" etc.

WTF?!?!?!

Well, I thing some rules could be good, but I also think in a lot of freedom for the poster.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Well, I kinda know what YOU think, Gramphos - you WERE Science ADvisor in the Civ2 game for a while... I mean punkbass2000 - could you please clarify where your stance is on these matters?

"Constitution" - you seem to agree with the idea of a flexible set of rules, but want to make polling formats rather well regulated - I don't see how much of this strictly necessary

Trust in the ppl - you favour trusting everyone enough to let them have the savegame yet at the same time suggest polling regulations (and perhaps other regulations as well) so that the same trusted ppl don't cheat to get the results they want.

If we're to vote and participate fullt all of us need to know what is going on - please let me know what you mean!

[Kuciwalker]

Also, what you've been talking about hasn't happened in the Civ2 Demo Game, and I don't think it will here.

[Gramphos]

No, probably not. Personally I don't see the need for the prepoll discussion. I think that if you fiund out that you've made totally wrong options you could just do a repoll. In most cases the options you came up with will do.