Poll reform suggestion

Shaitan

der Besucher
Joined
Dec 7, 2001
Messages
6,546
Location
Atlanta, GA
There have been some problems with polls lately. Specifically, due to time constraints and occasional lack of discussion the Quick Poll option is being used and abused quite a bit. Some small changes can be made to make the polling procedure quite a bit more user friendly while maintaining the original intent of having Poll Procedures.

A little history lesson: Way back in DG1 we had a period where there were tons of black polls. These were polls that were put up late or even during a chat, had very little participation and were used to justify major policy decisions. This led to our adoption of quorums and minimum poll running times. These reforms solved the problems of underrepresented polls being used to run the game but have seemingly proven to be too restrictive for fair and general use. This has led to the misuse of the Quick Polls and having major decisions ratified by citizen polls in the chats.

The original intent of the Poll Procedures was to make sure that a fair number of citizens were involved in the decisions that were being made. We can accomplish this goal without the lengthy time requirements. As my proposed reform below will show, the quorum alone is enough guarantee of participation. Time requirements are not necessary to insure participation when the quorum is already forcing a certain level of participation.

Another major time factor of the current rules is a 24 hour mandatory discussion period followed by a 24 hour mandatory prepoll period. Although lengthy and involved discussion are healthy and desired, these arbitrary limits simply do not function well and are overly burdensome. My proposal removes these from the mandatory list and puts them in the preferred list.

The major point in my proposal that I expect to get bad feedback on is that I have moved "advertising" from preferred to mandatory. As the time requirements are being removed it becomes very important that people be advised when a poll is posted. The way to do that is to advertise the poll in the Poll Registry and related department thread(s).

Following is my suggestion for new poll procedures. Under that is the current section. Note that the reformed procedures are quite a bit simpler and remove the wishy-washy "should" type vocabulary that has caused problems in the past.

Suggested Poll Procedures
Code:
A.	A quorum of participation is required for a poll to be binding. 
	1.	Quorum for polls is 1/3 of the active census within the
		first 24 hours or;
	2.	1/2 of the active census after the first 24 hours.
B.	The following criteria are required for a poll to be valid:
	1.	Poll type in the header and first post. 
	2.	Poll end dates/times noted in the first post. 
		A.	End dates/times can be conditional. (Example: 
			poll ends at the beginning of the next chat turn) 
	3.	Participation requirement (quorum needed) noted in the 
		first post.
	4.	Link to relevant discussion threads in the first post. 
	5.	Inclusion of an "Abstain" option. 
	6.	Link to the poll in the Poll Registry and/or Department 
		Thread (if appropriate).
C.	The following criteria are preferred for all polls:
	1.	Discussion thread, up for 24 hours minimum.
	2.	Proposed poll, up for 24 hours minimum.
	3.	Poll posted with link from discussion thread. 
	4.	Poll duration minimum of 24 hours (48 hours plus is 
		preferred). 
		A.	If the poll runs into the weekend it is advised 
			that the duration be extended by 24 hours for 
			each weekend day. Forum participation is much 
			lower on the weekends. 
D.	Information polls - Do not have restrictions and cannot be used 
	to justify policy, plans or actions. 
	1.	All polls posted by Leaders are considered Official unless 
		specifically noted to be informational in the header and 
		first post.
Current Poll Procedures
Code:
1.	A poll is not valid unless a quorum of participation has been reached. 
2.	All polls should have the following information: 
	A.	Poll type in the header and first post. 
	B.	Poll start and end dates/times in the first post. 
		1.	End dates/times can be conditional. (Example: poll ends
			at the beginning of the next chat turn) 
	C.	Link to relevant discussion threads in the first post. 
	D.	Inclusion of an "Abstain" option. 
3.	Official polls 
	A.	Quorum level is 1/2 of the active census. 
	B.	Poll should proceed as follows: 
		1.	Discussion thread, up for 24 hours minimum (48 hours 
			plus is preferred). Then, 
		2.	Proposed poll, up for 24 hours minimum. Then, 
		3.	Poll posted with link from discussion thread. 
		4.	Poll duration is a minimum of 24 hours (48 hours plus
			is preferred). 
			a.	If the poll runs into the weekend it is advised
				that the duration be extended by 24 hours for 
				each weekend day. Forum participation is much 
				lower on the weekends. 
		5.	Link to the poll in the Poll Registry and/or Department 
				Thread (if appropriate). 
4.	Quick polls - When topic discussion is unwarranted or poll procedures 
	cannot be maintained due to time constraints, a quick poll may be used. 
	A.	Quick polls do not have to follow the time conditions of Official
		Polls. 
	B.	Quorum level is 1/3 of the active census. 
	C.	Results may be used to make temporary changes or specific, one 
		time decisions. They may not be used to make permanent article or
		law changes. 
		1.	The specific action item must be noted. 
		2.	The action item must be applicable to the upcoming turn
			chat. 
		3.	The action item should be instantaneous or 
			reversible/correctable. 
			a.	Examples of items that meet the criteria are: 
				i.	City name change 
				ii.	Change of tiles worked in a city 
				iii.	Tile development 
				iv.	Purchasing a technology 
				v.	Upgrading troops 
				vi.	Changing a build queue 
			b.	Examples of items that would not meet the criteria
				are: 
				i.	Deals with a duration (resources or 
					gold/turn involved) 
				ii.	Declaration of war 
				iii.	Disbanding troops 
		4.	These actions may be reversed, changed or overruled by any 
			subsequent Official Poll. 
		5.	Information polls - Do not have restrictions and cannot be 
			used to justify policy, plans or actions. 
			A.	All polls posted by Leaders are considered Official 
				unless specifically noted to be informational in the 
				header and first post.
 
Excellent job, Shaitan. Not only have you made the document easirer to read, but you've used words like binding, official, and others in a manner that clearly makes them more understandable, by putting them in the appropriate places. Very well written. It's amazing how 7 months can change the way a document is written.
 
I like the way this revision is going, although I do have a couple of issues with it. One is that under these rules there is no explicit differentiation between requirements for polls that deal with long term, far reaching decisions and those that are more time sensitive in that a decision must be reached by the next Turn Chat. Under the proposed new rules it would in fact be possible for the equivalent of a Quick Poll to completely reverse the direction of the game having only scraped up to the lower quorum and without having been preceded by any discussion whatsoever.

The other is more of a request for an additional restriction than an issue with the proposal, and that restriction is... Use of an Other/Write-in option in any shape or form is expressly forbidden in all official polls, or words to that effect. I feel that these options do more harm than good since they can result in the introduction of a new and popular choice after many have already voted, and this can in turn cause great confusion when attempting to interpret the result of the poll. Given that polls are supposed to give a clear and decisive indication of the popular will, such confusion can only be detrimental to the running of the game.
 
First off... Great job Shaitan!

I am pleased to see the inclusion of several previously mentioned and presumably forgotten recommendations as well (such as posting the quorum number in the first post, etc...).

I am somewhat concerned about the removal of any time requirement on official polls. While I agree that the 48 hours may be somewhat over-restrictive, having no time limit at all may prompt people to vote immediately on an issue rather than think it out for a while before voting... out of fear that the poll will reach quorum and their vote will not be tallied.

A more minor concern of mine.... In B-6, you state that the poll must be advertised in "the Poll Registry and/or Department thread...", yet Secion B is for items that are required for a poll to be valid. This seems inconsistent. Some suggestions:
  • Move this entire item to Section C for preferred items.
  • Remove the part of this item referring to the Department Threads and make that part preferred (listed seperately under Section C).
  • Remove the requirement for posting in the Registry and make advertising in the Department threads mandatory.

These are just some suggestions of mine. I'm eager to see some changes made to our polling procedures. We need to inject some more flexibility into the game.
 
I agree that there is a danger area as EK described and FortyJ commented upon. Unfortunately we cannot institute legislation to fit all possible occurences. Any time requirement is redundant to the quorum requirements so shouldn't be a factor. The quorum requirements are stepped to allow easier passage in the first 24 hours. This is done to allow the effect of the old Quick Poll. If that much participation is generated in 24 hours, we can assume that 48 hours would provide the higher quorum.

This plan gives the best overall protection while still being flexible enough when speed is truly needed. As always, the citizenry shall need to be alert to hasty proposals and/or poorly planned ones. We can only protect ourselves against ourselves so much.

EK - I disagree that write-ins should be prohibited from official polls. With time requirements removed it becomes more important than ever for dissenting opinions to be expressed easily.

40J - Good catch. Advertising in the registry should be required. Advertising in the department thread should be preferred.
 
Shaitan,

I don't like your proposal. It's better that the current law but I disagree with some points.

1. Information poll is not usefull oficially, so we should not specify it.

2. It's not good to have a official poll be valid in 2 hours, with 12 citizen in a 7 x 5 result. I think 24 hours is need.

3. The discussion thread should be created at the same time of the official poll.

4. Forget the propesed poll. Instead of this, let's require the "Null" option, meaning the citizen disagrees with all valid options and/or with the entire poll.

Example: It's missing a important option or the question is not clear.

My suggestion is more flexible then the current procedure but is harder than yours. And it is more simple.

Suggestion #2:

Code:
A. O official poll requires
	1. The title must be "Official Poll: " + subject
	2. At least one discussion thread
	3. The first post of the official poll must contain
		A. Clear and objective question
		B. End date/times 
		C. All valid options
		D. "Abstain" option meaning the citizen agrees with any valid option.
		E. "Null" option meaning the citizen disagrees 
		with all valid options and/or with the entire poll.
		F. A link to relevant discussion thread
	4. Relevant discussion threads must
		A. have posts that contains a link to the official poll
		B. have posts with the question and all options of the poll
	5. The poll registry thread must have a post with a link to the official poll
B. A official poll is only valid
	1. After 24 hours of the poll
	2. If one relevant discussion thread has 24 hours at least.
	3. If the quorum is 1/2 of the active census
	4. If "Null" option result is less then 1/3
C. Sunday is not valid day for time requirements in official polls
 
What about including a provision that all official polls must remain open until at least the next scheduled turn chat?

This would prevent someone from posting a poll early and then closing it and considering it official after it meets quorum even though there may be plenty of time before the turn chat for others to vote.
 
Originally posted by FortyJ
What about including a provision that all official polls must remain open until at least the next scheduled turn chat?

This would prevent someone from posting a poll early and then closing it and considering it official after it meets quorum even though there may be plenty of time before the turn chat for others to vote.

FortyJ,

We have a problem with this. Suppose we need two (or more) polls in sequence to the next Turn Chat (TC). Something like:

- Peace / War?
- War against who?

With you suggestion, it would be impossible to start the second poll.
 
On the contrary Roberto, follow-up polls could easily be made conditional upon passage of the first poll. Furthermore, these follow-up polls are uncommon as they can most often be combined into one poll.

Using your example, the first poll is unnecessary as our state of war or peace is implied within the second poll. In other words, if we intend to poll the citizens on a Declaration of War against America, there is no need to first poll the people on whether or not we should go to war.
 
Hmmm... I'd rather we elect leaders who put up polls in a timely fashion.

Seems to me this proposal only serves to lower the amount of votes needed. We go from a quorum of 1/2 the active census to a quorum of 1/3 OR 1/2 depending on how long the poll is up!

If you want to stop the Quick Poll abuse then put some teeth into the CoS. Quick Poll abuses only violate the CoS and CoS violations carry a maximum penalty of a warning.
 
Donsig
Naturally, it will always be to everyone's benefit when a leader posts a poll in a timely fashion.

In my opinion, Shaitan's proposal (especially the section concerning the sliding quorum requirements) solves many of the problems we have with our current polling procedures. It essentially eliminates the confusion about what is a quick poll, what isn't a quick poll, etc....

Under this plan, all official polls would start out as "quick" polls and automatically upgrade (for lack of a better word) to "standard" polls after 24 hours. With such a plan, leaders won't have to worry about which type of poll to post, and through elections, the citizens can still hold them accountable for posting polls in a timely manner.
 
I have always been against lowering the requirements to make a poll binding. nothing has changed to alter my thinking on this issue. Shaitan's proposal lowers the quorum - in effect it makes everything a quick poll. There is nothing to stop leaders from posting polls a day before the chat. in fact, this proposal encourages that behavior! A leader wanting to slide a proposal through is now encouraged to wait till the last minute before posting a poll on the subject. Post the poll a day before the chat and voila! you don't have to worry about getting 1/2 the ACTIVE census (which isn't even the FULL census to begin with). You also don't have to worry about repurcussions in the form of a PI!

As always I want to remind everyone that quorums were instituted in order to set a level for making a poll binding. A binding poll is one that must be followed by our leaders. If a leader does not follow a binding poll he or she is subject to a PI. Conversely, leaders who follow a binding poll can use the poll as evidence in a PI to back their actions. The point that most people seem to forget whenever we have this discussion is that a poll does not have to be binding (nor even valid) for the action covered by the poll to be carried out.
 
There's no perfect answer here so we have to try to find the best (most workable) answer. No matter what we decide, there will be opportunity for abuse. It will be up to the citizens to police the leaders, just as it always has been. In fact, since citizens can post the polls as well, it's up to everybody to police (and support) everybody else.

Our reality is we overregulated polls and are having difficulty in minding the requirements. We need to return to the basic problem and put in a fair and simple system that covers the majority of situations. The first 24 hours uses the same quorum requirements as a Quick Poll because those requirements worked well and insure that a sizeable portion of the populace is involved in making the decision. It grows to what is currently the standard poll quorum after 24 hours because if a poll can't show a high level of participation in the first 24 hours then it most likely has a problem (or the issue is being debated or somesuch) and a larger segment of the population should be required to be involved in the decision.

There is no encouragement for posting a poll late. The poll will always pass or fail on its merits so delaying posting it will not make it more likely to pass. By allowing a real poll to be valid based on participation instead of time we are actually allowing more time for discussion.
 
All good points, donsig. Now I have to rethink the change. I originally liked the change, but you've found some lawyer loopholes I need to check out.
 
We would have a hell of a time trying to get a 1/3 representation in 24 hours in a poll, let alone 1/2 in the first 24 hours. If Im reading it correctly, the new rules would make it so there wa a given number of participants that MUST be filled for a poll to be binding? (Code B point 3). If not, I suggest we have something like that.

A leader wanting to slide a proposal through is now encouraged to wait till the last minute before posting a poll on the subject.
the foul stench of corruption?
 
To be honest, I think the better solution is to increase the amount of time between turn chats.;)
 
@Immortal - These are actually the levels we have been using. Previously the different levels were split into two different poll categories with different criteria.

It's actually not that hard to get these levels of participation for hot topics. For topics that aren't so hot, the poll remains open until the quorum (participation level) is met.

And yes, these quorum levels define the number of participants that must participate before the poll is binding.
 
YES! Eyrei! what an excellent idea (I pushed for it in DG1).

I see, thank you for clarification Mr.Shaitan :)
 
Back
Top Bottom