The Polling Standards Commission

[Space05us]

start a new thread and clutter the forum even more? you're are a truely funny man!

[punkbass2000]

Everybody loves a clown, so why don't you?

[Moral Hazard]

These two conditions are the only two that I believe are necessary.

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.

and.

, I would like to add that if a repoll occurs it should have at least 75% 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.

If we find that more conditions are necessary we can add them; most of the bad polls to date. I think will cease to happen in the future. However I do believe Punk's original seven should be kept as a guideline but not as rules.

[Chubbs]

in relation to the issue brought up in the "a problem with the polls" thread (it said to post ideas here) i believe i have a solution
i realized this when going over the polls set up for deciding the age.
it was sugsted tht when a poll w/mutipl answrs was neded ie:
Yes A
yes B
yes C
no

that there be consecutive polls consisting of:
Yes
No

and then if yes won the:
Yes A
Yes B
Yes C

this however would waste a lot of time, it was then suggested that all answers be in 1 poll.
Yes A
" B
" C
No

this way would have the total of the all three 'yes' against the total of the single 'no' and then if the 'yes' won it would proceed to which yes got the most votes, however this would exclude the people who voted for 'no'.
ex:
4 votes YA
5 votes YB
3 Votes YC
2 votes NO

'Yes B' would win but what if the who voted 'no' had known that 'no' would lose and would instead like to vote for 'yes A' because that one fits their ideals more than the other 'yes' options, and if they did 'yes A' then it would have won.

I think we should have multiple votes at the same time when a subject like this comes up.
so my idea is to use the original suggestion of multiple polls but not wait until the resutls come in just vote on all possible outcomes in different polls at the same time.

[punkbass2000]

Originally posted by Moral Hazard
However I do believe Punk's original seven should be kept as a guideline but not as rules.

Many of them were just guidelines, actually. This would include all the ones with 'should'. This was because they wouldn't apply in all situations.

[Trevman]

We just need a very simple rule or two on polls such as:
Polls should be open for a minimum of 48 hours and closed in a timely manner.
Polls should include information about the decision in the first post.
No reference to banana should be an option in a poll.

That's all we need.

[Moral Hazard]

Seeing as polls are sacrosanct. I'm starting to think that more conditions should be set up. I've copied most of it.

Polls must be open for a minimum of 48 hours and closed in a timely manner. The closing date must be set 48 hours before the closing of the poll.

If a repoll (which will happen if enough valid objections to the poll are raised) occurs it should have at least 75% 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.

The first two must be followed. The following are strongly suggested.

The options should be as simplistic as possible, with a 'yes/no' vote, if possible. This helps ensure majorities instead of pluralities. If there are several yes options or several no options; then individual polls should be used. One poll with 'yes' and 'no' then a seperate poll for the 'yes' options and one for the 'no' options. These polls may all be run at the same time so we dont have to wait for the results to appear from the first poll.

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. If a poll lacks a popular option it will be grounds for a repoll.

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

Polls must include information about the decision in the first post. The decision would include both an unbiased explanation of the options; as well as whats to be done in case of lack of majority. Specifying runoffs, agregation, plurality, averaged, or a different method. If the method used raises objections than either a repoll will be held, or a poll determining if the method used in said poll is legitimate. If the explanations are considered biased it will be considered another valid reason for a revote.

All polls should have an 'other - explain below' option, allowing 'write-in' votes. This condition is strongly recommended for polls were no previous discussions could be held; such as urgent polls and decision polls.

Agregation explained. (should generally be avoided)
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.


I would like to thank and credit Gramphos, Punkbass2000, Chubbs, and Trevman for the poll conditions. I would like to hold a vote on this soon. The only reason I didn't use Punkbass2000's original list is that I want things a little more solid.

Your thoughts?

[Chubbs]

about the agregation
I tried to explain it up above but i guess i wasnt to clear

we need to have individual polls for each otion so a poll for 'yes' and 'no' then a seperate poll for the 'yes' options and one for the 'no' options but dont wait for the results to appear from the first poll just have all three at the same time and only use the results from those that win.

[Moral Hazard]

Ok thanks, Yeah your first post lost me thanks. That's pretty clear I'll edit it in to the suggestions.

[Spiffor]

Moral Hazard :
Your rules are simple and completely democratic. I think they'll do great for the sake of our democracy

[Moral Hazard]

Some people might find this useful. Oh and look at the suggestions.

[MrWhereItsAt]

So..... complex!

Sorry MH, I liked Trevman's - simple and short.

Away for a few days and this forum has already run away from me. And we haven't even started yet! What chance have those of us with less than 5 hours per day to spend here to understand what's going on?

[ThePlagueRat]

That's democracy!
Yeah, and written as nice paragraphs.
How do we constitutionalize this? by poll, of course...
...and a presidential signature. (with a featherpen)

[Panag]

hi ,

maybe the senate could work on the poll's , ....
this way they can check for evrything that goes in it ,
and save time for other people , who need to use their time at their job's , ...

have a nice day

[ThePlagueRat]

Originally posted by panag
hi ,

maybe the senate could work on the poll's , ....
this way they can check for evrything that goes in it ,
and save time for other people , who need to use their time at their job's , ...

have a nice day

Looks like most people are voting against a senate now...
I voted pro-senate, thinking of it as a national peoples assembly where the members was to take care of the executives concerning corrution-matters and antidemocratic tendencies.
The executive branch has nothing else to rely on than the goodwill of the people...
a goodwill who might be perishing.

We could poll for a National Apolytonian Parliament instead?
You could become an MP !
(or at least just discuss that for a while)