Seems like this is just turning into another pointless abstract debate, as it always goes when we discuss voting methods.

Can we just pick one without getting philosophical about it? We are a community of less than 40-50 people at max population. As someone who was forced to study this stuff to get my degree, it doesn’t really matter what method we use with such a small population.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(01-04-2019, 11:46 AM)Belschaft Wrote: The failure of approval to allow for preferences to be expressed is my main problem, really. It’s not unusual for people to be okay with multiple candidates potentially winning, but have a clear preference for a particular candidate or candidates over the others.

As I’ve said many, many times before - there is no “perfect” electoral system, just systems that make particular outcomes more or less likely and favour certain types of candidates.

If there is a consensus that we would prefer “unobjectionable” candidates with broad but potentially shallow bases support to be favoured for the Delegacy, this is a change that will achieve that. Personally I still feel that we should be favouring candidates who are most people’s first choice.

Ack! I just lost my post!

Bel — yes, I think this is exactly what we need for the delegate position. Broad support for an unobjectionable candidate. 

I don't think we should re-open these debates over voting because our voting has been working for the other positions, it just has an issue when we're choosing multiple winners. Our delegate elections are a unique proposition in the region because of the two-vote process. In that vein, since we vote twice, the delegate election process really addresses the preference flaw with approval voting.

In an effort to move this along, I'd like to motion to vote on my original draft changes to the Election Act (unless there are specifics here we'd like to change):
 

Quote:(2) On the first of every January and July, the Assembly will convene for the first round of Delegate elections.
a. Any eligible legislator wishing to run for Delegate may declare their candidacy, and the Assembly will debate the merits of their platform. Any player who has been banned from World Assembly membership will be considered ineligible and any candidate who is later discovered to be banned from World Assembly membership will be immediately disqualified.
b. The campaign and debate period will last one week, after which the Assembly will vote for 3 days.
c. This round of voting for delegate will be conducted using Approval Voting.
c.d. The two candidates ranked first and second under IRVwith the highest number of approvals will move to a second round of voting conducted via a a poll of Native World Assembly members.
e. Should the voting result in a tie, more than two nations can move onto the second round of voting.

(3) After receiving the top two candidates in the forum election, the sitting Delegate election commissioner will create a week-long regional poll accessible to Native World Assembly members, instructing them to vote for their preferred candidate.
a. A Dispatch containing the campaigns of both all candidates will be created to aid voters in their choice.
b. The candidate who wins a majority of the votes will be declared the Delegate-elect.
c. If no candidate wins a majority of votes, the top two candidates with be placed in a runoff election, mimicking the previous round of voting.

I'm down with Tsu's draft.

Yes, I think that Tsu's proposal is entirely satisfactory and the provisions for the second round are a sensible inclusion, too.

There are a few grammatical flaws...

Quote:(2) On the first of every January and July, the Assembly will convene for the first round of Delegate elections.
a. Any eligible legislator wishing to run for Delegate may declare their candidacy, and the Assembly will debate the merits of their platform. Any player who has been banned from World Assembly membership will be considered ineligible and any candidate who is later discovered to be banned from World Assembly membership will be immediately disqualified.
b. The campaign and debate period will last one week, after which the Assembly will vote for 3 days.
c. This round of voting for delegate will be conducted using Approval Voting.c.d. The two candidates ranked first and second under IRV with the highest number of approvals will move to a second round of voting conducted via a a poll of Native World Assembly members.
e. Should the voting result in a tie, more than two nations can move onto the second round of voting.

(3) After receiving the top two candidates in the forum election, the sitting Delegate election commissioner will create a week-long regional poll accessible to Native World Assembly members, instructing them to vote for their preferred candidate.
a. A Dispatch containing the campaigns of both all candidates will be created to aid voters in their choice.
b. The candidate who wins a majority of the votes will be declared the Delegate-elect.
c. If no candidate wins a majority of votes, the top two candidates with be placed in a runoff election, mimicking the previous round of voting.

- In section 2d, there was a double "a", reading "conducted via a poll"
- In section 3, the word "the" should not be moved, reading "the election commissioner..."

Id motion this draft to vote.

In (2) c., it should be "will be placed" not "with be placed", and (1) d. needs to be on a new line.

Perhaps (1) d. should have 'may move on' instead of 'can move on'?

Changes made. And, just to be upfront, this also changes the polling on the RMB to the EC.

One other question: If we allow more than two people to the final round, we might have a delegate with less than 50% of the vote. Is that OK with everyone? The other alternative would be for the top in the second round to go to a runoff?
 

Quote:(2) On the first of every January and July, the Assembly will convene for the first round of Delegate elections.
a. Any eligible legislator wishing to run for Delegate may declare their candidacy, and the Assembly will debate the merits of their platform. Any player who has been banned from World Assembly membership will be considered ineligible and any candidate who is later discovered to be banned from World Assembly membership will be immediately disqualified.
b. The campaign and debate period will last one week, after which the Assembly will vote for 3 days.
c. This round of voting for delegate will be conducted using Approval Voting.c.d. The two candidates ranked first and second under IRV with the highest number of approvals will move to a second round of voting conducted via a a poll of Native World Assembly members.
e. Should the voting result in a tie, more than two nations may move onto the second round of voting.

(3) After receiving the top two candidates in the forum election, the sitting Delegate election commissioner will create a week-long regional poll accessible to Native World Assembly members, instructing them to vote for their preferred candidate.
a. A Dispatch containing the campaigns of both all candidates will be created to aid voters in their choice.
b. The candidate who wins a majority of the votes will be declared the Delegate-elect.
c. If no candidate wins a majority of votes, the top two candidates will be placed in a runoff election, mimicking the previous round of voting.

Oh, I was reading (3) c. to mean if no candidate got more than 50% of the vote, but I guess that's an absolute majority, not just a majority. I'd be happier if it was changed to ensure the winner did recurrent more than 50% of the vote, though. Run offs are fine, I'm sure.

I don't support this draft.
I think that the current voting system is fine, and if this was implemented it would be harder for newcomers to gain support (An "establishment" candidate would probably garner more approval votes because of their name recognition, while since newcomers don't have as much name recognition it would be harder for them to garner support)

(01-05-2019, 07:37 PM)Seraph Wrote: Oh, I was reading (3) c. to mean if no candidate got more than 50% of the vote, but I guess that's an absolute majority, not just a majority. I'd be happier if it was changed to ensure the winner did recurrent more than 50% of the vote, though. Run offs are fine, I'm sure.

Whoops. I forgot I added that in the draft. But, that's exactly what I meant 
 

(01-05-2019, 09:10 PM)North Prarie Wrote: I don't support this draft.
I think that the current voting system is fine, and if this was implemented it would be harder for newcomers to gain support (An "establishment" candidate would probably garner more approval votes because of their name recognition, while since newcomers don't have as much name recognition it would be harder for them to garner support)

NP — I'm not going to beat around the bush, that is largely the point. We want people who are well-known and trusted in the region (see the security discussion and idea to make service to the region mandatory before running for delegate).

Personally, if someone isn't well-known by the majority of legislators (at least), they shouldn't be delegate. Delegate's have awesome power (in the literal sense) and it only takes one rouge delegate to f--- things up for a long time.