2012 CFC Presidential Election

[NedimNapoleon]

Coalitions or mutual associations IRL are often formed post election once results are in, to the same result as the coalition announced during our prolonged election here would have. Im simply announcing it now instead of after the results are in precisely because of the response that particular action would endenger, and because its more transparent to let the constituency know as soon as the deal is struck so they can act according to their own perspectives on the matter.

As to the Communists making a coalition with the Hipster/douches, if they are willing to shackle themselves to you I see no reason why that should be forbidden, just as I have no problem if the Hipster party wants to join the Coalition of the Right to create a united front against you. But if they do join with you, obviously I would not like it for self-evident reasons, but that does not mean I have to cry foul over it just because it upsets some self-loving superiority complex of mine, like apparently the coalition of the right has done to you .

Oh and on the communists being pre-destined to winning, that is not for you to determine, but to the voters.



At systematically destroying ones economy in practice.

Even if you form a coalition the single party with the most votes will be declared the winner, so forming these types of coalitions is pretty useless (the forum doesn't have a parliament). I'm not stating that I've decided that the communist party will win, but with the current votes it would win and the election end is drawing near.

How dare you insult the almighty Yugo car! Its an economic miracle!

 

[JohannaK]

The Yugo, the one car most loathed by Top Gear.

 

[NedimNapoleon]

It was cheap, nuff said.

 

[JohannaK]

Of course it was, with the state dictating the price.

 

[Zack]

Do you really care enough about a silly, utterly meaningless forum "election" to fraudulently try and manipulate the votes into earning you the victory? Are you really that pathetic?

Besides, if the incumbent was running for re-election, he would wipe the floor.

 

[CELTICEMPIRE]

How dare you insult the almighty Yugo car! Its an economic miracle!

My parents drove one of those in the '80s, they bought one for only $100.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Initially the electoral system for this game, for good or ill, was based off of the American system, which does not allow for this type of coalition government.

On the other hand, I know that non-American governments do allow for this sort of thing.

I have no further comment than that. I initially started this game about a year ago but have no authority over it anymore. As far as I know this coalition issue has yet to ever be addressed.

This will certainly be dealt with next time if we have another game in 2013. But for now I don't really know what to make of it.

 

[Ailedhoo]

Initially the electoral system for this game, for good or ill, was based off of the American system, which does not allow for this type of coalition government.

On the other hand, I know that non-American governments do allow for this sort of thing.

I have no further comment than that. I initially started this game about a year ago but have no authority over it anymore. As far as I know this coalition issue has yet to ever be addressed.

This will certainly be dealt with next time if we have another game in 2013. But for now I don't really know what to make of it.

I has some suggestions for the next game:

1) A better election model would be the German, Welsh or Scottish systems of voting: Additional Member System.

2) Have it held in the summer holidays. It may allow better contributions, especilly for students.

 

[W|M]

Yeah, it's only a month until the summer holidays anyway.

 

[NedimNapoleon]

My parents drove one of those in the '80s, they bought one for only $100.

The company that made Yugos (Zastava) also made the good ol' Communist export of AK-47s. You could get them much cheaper than $100

 

[NickyJ]

The Supreme Court is still debating this.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Who's the Supreme Court?

 

[NickyJ]

The guy standing behind the curtain. You can see his suit over there.






<-----

 

[Ailedhoo]

The guy standing behind the curtain. You can see his suit over there.






<-----

One judge? That is undemocratic! There must be a group of judges for the matter!

 

[GhostWriter16]

I honestly don't know who really has the authority. If it was any one person, its probably me since I started the game. If there's any second authority, its probably NickyJ.

That said, both of us have something of a vested interest in the outcome so I don't really think its fair to invoke "Gamestarter" right now either.

I'd also probably disagree with NickyJ on what to call if I had to call it right now.

 

[Ailedhoo]

I honestly don't know who really has the authority. If it was any one person, its probably me since I started the game. If there's any second authority, its probably NickyJ.

That said, both of us have something of a vested interest in the outcome so I don't really think its fair to invoke "Gamestarter" right now either.

I'd also probably disagree with NickyJ on what to call if I had to call it right now.

Personally I suggest you think about a committee of judges of all political observations. This way we will earn stuff that is BBC style objectivity.

Above all ensure that the head judge if there is a head is not connected to a policial path but of ballance in the way of a British civil servant. The British Civil Service is not permitted to link to the political parties. This is a design of effeciency and ensuring the job is set for long term stability of the nation. Hence a good model to set who is to be the head judge if there is to be a head judge or chairman of the committee. It all depends on what occures.

 

[GhostWriter16]

I'm pretty sure coalitions aren't happening. I'm not deciding though.

 

[Jehoshua]

Even if its not permitted, we still show a united front which has its own purposes as I have mentioned. Regardless on coalitions though, I think they should be permitted (duh) if only because the american system, which is predicated on a binary party system, doesn't work in this multi-party environment. Currently one only needs to have the most votes, even if your no where near a majority. (so if the election ended now under such a system, the commies would win 17 votes to 27 amongst the other parties, thats around 38 - 39 percent of the vote which would enshrine a minority of peoples will, and marginalise the rest)

 

[Zack]

How about this - next time, you form one conservative party, before the election starts.

 

[GhostWriter16]

That was what I tried to do. And its a fact inherent in the game. Hence why I tried to get them to unite beforehand.

In real life, yeah, I agree with you that an American style system with 3+ parties isn't fair.

However, this is just a game and so the fact that votes will be split among candidates is more "Feature" than it is "Bug."

Should coalitions be allowed? I honestly don't know, I wouldn't mind if such a feature were implemented, and it would make the game kind of fun, but at the same point increase the number of winners which makes it less effective.

Its never been discussed though so I don't really know what the rules are for this election. The issue will certainly be decided beforehand next time.

*Shrugs Shoulders* I'm not making the decision unless I am asked to do so.