Election: President

[wervdon]

problem with that is it isnt confidential.. i know I value my privacy, dunno bout you.

I said thats the only reason I could see not to do it aside from a tad bit of extra work

And I do value my privacy irl, but on here I could care less Id rather have to publically vote than not have my vote counted because someone started screaming double logins anyways.


In any case if we wanted to, we could do it exactly how its done and rl and require registration to vote with the election commission, and then submit votes privately to them for them to count and put up. There's two problems with that though:
1) We have to trust the election commission. Which isn't a huge problem, I think we have enough honest people playing this game to come up with a few people who won't be playing with chads so to speak.
2) It makes it more of a pain for people to vote, since people would have to PM or email the election commission.

Edit:
But don't get me wrong, I think the _best_ system for a game where it doesnt really matter that much who wins or loses, is what we've been doing so long as we can just live with and trust the results But if we are going to go down the road of not trusting each other, then the other solution is signing up to vote in some manner.

[notyoueither]

Hmmm. wervdon has one possible workable scenario. In fact, the voter list should be the citizen list as of the day before debate begins. None could be disenfranchised in that case.

In that case, Mark and or Ming could always catch a barrel full of DLs if someone tried to pull a stunt. Since it would involve posting (and IP tracking of posts is definitely within their capability.

A varient on this would be to PM election officials with your votes. 1 PM per election with your votes for all offices. That would address Ninot's privacy concerns. If an election were challenged, then the election official(s) could invite the court to enquire from certain citizens whom they voted for and check this against the election tally of whom voted for whom.

Uber had another suggestion. A private site could run a script to record who voted for who. That site would need a log in, you would be required to have the same user name as in the member thread. 1 or more scrutineers could have access to the log. We will very likely have a site very soon, so this would be possible too.

I am not sure which way to go, but something other than the unviewable, public polls will have to be enacted, very soon. That process should also be used for any laws passed.

[Kramerman]

Its a good idea, and it can be brought up to debate under the next administration. But I still think the best solution is a judicial branch.

Kman

[notyoueither]

All the judges in the world cannot overcome hidden, publically accessible polls.

[Kramerman]

SUPER Judges could...

[Timeline]

This decision is by no means final. Trip is correct that there is no law stating it cannot be done, but there is not law stating it can.

This is a democracy, and the people decide all matters here. I am creating an opinion poll so we may ascertain the general people's approval of this decision.

If 51-67% of the people disagree with this dicision, then I strongly suggest these two candidates seriously reconsider.

If most people agree with having two Presidents, and their votes ignored, then this action will pass, and we will have two Presidents once both polls (this one and the opinion poll) are closed.

[Kramerman]

In all seriousness I was refering to judges as to handle the situation with Ninot andTrip declaring they will share the presidency. My fault, I mest up writing that post, probably my momentary dislexia/retardation kicking in...

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Timeline
This decision is by no means final. Trip is correct that there is no law stating it cannot be done, but there is not law stating it can.

This is a democracy, and the people decide all matters here. I am creating an opinion poll so we may ascertain the general people's approval of this decision.

If 51-67% of the people disagree with this dicision, then I strongly suggest these two candidates seriously reconsider.

If most people agree with having two Presidents, and their votes ignored, then this action will pass, and we will have two Presidents once both polls (this one and the opinion poll) are closed.

Thats a good idea, I guess as long as this poll is open, opening an opinion poll would not slow the process down any.

[Kloreep]

To Ninot and Trip: Have you decided exactly how you would divide up responsibilities? Would the outcome of the election affect this, or would you treat it as invalid and disregard it when delegating the president's tasks to each other?

[Ninot]

Originally posted by Kloreep
To Ninot and Trip: Have you decided exactly how you would divide up responsibilities? Would the outcome of the election affect this, or would you treat it as invalid and disregard it when delegating the president's tasks to each other?

in the theme and spirit of this election, we have not decided anything!

we'll probably just divide the duties as to when they need to be done and who is better to do them.

[Kramerman]

To Ninot and Trip:
Would you abide by the outcome of Timeline's poll. In otherwords, if it is clear most of the citizens don't want yall to share power and instead go by the outcome of the election poll, would you? Or would you just disregard this. There is definately nothing that would make you abide by it, but it is democratic.

Kman

[Kloreep]

Originally posted by Ninot
we'll probably just divide the duties as to when they need to be done and who is better to do them.

Do you mean that you will treat the election poll as invalid (by deciding such delegation at your own discretions), or that the two of you need time to decide on things like my questions?

[Ninot]

im not quite sure Kloreep.. im only half a brain to this presidency right now...

IF we stay as a co-presidency, we would ignore the poll i guess

but we dont exactly know how to split the duties.

[Ninot]

Originally posted by Kramerman
To Ninot and Trip:
Would you abide by the outcome of Timeline's poll. In otherwords, if it is clear most of the citizens don't want yall to share power and instead go by the outcome of the election poll, would you? Or would you just disregard this. There is definately nothing that would make you abide by it, but it is democratic.

Kman

i dont think we can officially answer this yet

but a reasonable unofficial answer is "we will do the people's will, if it be reasonable"

[Moral Hazard]

That a ****ing terrible answer. That could be translated to we will do the peoples will if they agree with us.