| Bicameral-ness |
(01-15-2015, 01:05 AM)TAC Wrote:(01-15-2015, 12:13 AM)Unibot Wrote: I think non-binding polls are being used as a distraction here - we've already done them and they've already been a success. You're comparing apples and oranges here.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
(01-15-2015, 01:06 AM)Aramanchovia Wrote: Not sure if it has been mentioned yet, as I still haven't had a chance to read the whole topic, but would discounting votes on polls from low influence nations be an option? This would prevent people bringing a bunch of nations to the region just to vote, they would have to keep them there a certain amount of time first. Yes -- it would be a possibility.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
So the fact that there are less RMB votes on government related acts doesn't pertain to this RMB based legislative body?
This will be a system where some nations will have 2 votes, some nations will have one, some will still have none, and players with deep pockets will be able to buy the support they need with stamps.
(01-15-2015, 01:19 AM)TAC Wrote: So the fact that there are less RMB votes on government related acts doesn't pertain to this RMB based legislative body? You're suggesting that asking someone's "favorite color" is akin to asking someone about the government. If there is any question as to how serious RMB nations take governing, that would be it. (01-15-2015, 01:20 AM)Sopo Wrote: This will be a system where some nations will have 2 votes, some nations will have one, some will still have none, and players with deep pockets will be able to buy the support they need with stamps. It will be a system where everyone can have two votes, if they wish. (Remember, we've been arguing that the forums are open to all.) And, again, we've had several debates where it has been decided that campaigning is a legitimate part of the governing process.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
Tsunamy Wrote:You're suggesting that asking someone's "favorite color" is akin to asking someone about the government. If there is any question as to how serious RMB nations take governing, that would be it. No, I'm not suggesting that. I'm saying that less people are interested in government related posts, which is why the post count is much lower. It's the people that AREN'T VOTING. You could probably just pass it off as a coincidence, but you have to admit, the timing couldn't be worse. Quote:1. It would be possible for an outside group to move in WA nations before a vote takes place in order to sway it. 1. This however can be tracked by the speaker. I'd recommend it being a regional crime - voter fraud. 2. I think telegram distribution of a regional newspaper to fill a void for communication to lower house participants would give a public voice to people who want to write articles about things. This is where public media can help overcome gaps of inequality. 3. I was thinking it'd be pretty easy to accommidate citizens of all stripes. Since the votes would start at the same time in both houses. A. You could allow citizens to indicate support in the lower house by voting in a special thread. B. Perhaps citizens automatically voted in the lower house by voting in the Assembly - this would mean the bicameral system was more like of a pool of votes where Grand Assembly votes were two for each lower house vote.
(01-15-2015, 12:13 AM)Unibot Wrote: I think non-binding polls are being used as a distraction here - we've already done them and they've already been a success. So... what are we waiting for? Glen-Rhodes to grow old and die? The region's residents aren't getting any dumber and incompetent while we wait. If non-binding polls have been such a great successf in showing what the forums have to offer, then we should keep doing it. Don't fix what isn't broken. (01-15-2015, 12:29 AM)Tsunamy Wrote:(01-15-2015, 12:28 AM)Sopo Wrote: Addressing any of the security concerns may be a good place to start, then. No, Tsu, what you did was demolish the foundation of your reform, by making membership in the lower house much more restrictive than membership in the upper house. Your stated purpose is to fight against what you perceive is an unfair system of too many barriers on the forums. So if you're now offering a solution that creates even more barriers for the lower house (that was supposed to be your answer to having too many barriers on the forums), then why do it at all? Why not simply continue to focus on bringing people onto the forums, instead of giving up and just thrusting government onto the RMB? (01-15-2015, 10:01 AM)Unibot Wrote:Quote:1. It would be possible for an outside group to move in WA nations before a vote takes place in order to sway it. 1. And how will we try those people for such a crime? 2. Even more TG spam, on top of the massive amounts of TG spam that will happen when somebody wants their proposal to pass the RMB vote. 3. If you need to make things this complicated just to make one aspect of this idea "work," then perhaps the idea itself is too flawed in the first place. Also, it's wishful thinking to say that the votes will start at the same time. The Chair can't start a regional poll. We will have to wait until both the Chair and the Delegate are on at the same time. It's a small issue, but it will cause regular delays.
1. In absentia, would be one solution. At the very least, making it a crime, would enable the delegate to remove violators of the law from the region and the speaker to discount their votes.
2. There's nothing wrong with a newspaper distributing the region's media. That's not "SPAM", that's democracy. We should encourage more of that. 3. The votes don't even need to start at the same time for Solution A. They don't even need to start at the same time for Solution B. You're overthinking it - and probably deliberately, because you're trying to abstrusely find problems on a technical level (when you've already admitted you dislike the goal of greater democraticisation, regardless of how it is done). Quote:If non-binding polls have been such a great successf in showing what the forums have to offer, then we should keep doing it. Don't fix what isn't broken. You know that I hate the phrase, "don't fix what isn't broken". Why? Because it implies we cannot build on success and make progress. The reason we should expand upon what we're doing, instead of sticking with the status quo is because we can make things even better. And there's also the possibility that continuing the non-binding polls in the way we're doing could go from being a novel idea to a patronizing practice - especially in the wake of anti-reformists supporting it as the "compromise".
Trials in absentia for crimes committed by those who do not hold citizenship and do not affirm the Charter is not what I would call liberal democracy. The more this discussion goes on, the more willing you guys are to concede second-class citizenship to "fix" all the problems with this idea, by creating more and more restrictions to who can vote on the game-side, and decreasing the legal protections they would otherwise have by applying for citizenship on the forums. (Imagine how this discussion would be going if we were talking about making it a crime to come the forums to vote with the interests of some other region in mind. I know exactly where you would stand then.) Again, I think this raises the question of why this should be done in the first place.
|
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
I am a Super Villain
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |