discussion: only run for 1 position?

[disorganizer]

@chiefpaco: i think this will be another good idea. if we find that participation is better, we should only alow one position to be held.
we could also reformulate section E of this to allow multiple deputy-positions to be taken if no other nominee is there. if someone else is on place 2 for a deputy position and the #1 already has another position, the #2 will get the second position.

 

[Shaitan]

Originally posted by Almightyjosh
Thi means that the group of newer people in governorships will be very hesitant to stand for any leader office.

Just a quick response here. Governors are leader positions.

 

[Shaitan]

This will need a Council sponsor:

current:
Section 6. Eligibility
C. Each citizen may run for 1 position in each election cycle.

proposed:
C. Incumbent leaders may run for 1 position in each election cycle. Other citizens may run for 2 positions in each election cycle.

 

[Almightyjosh]

sorry, I was using 'leaders' as short for Millitary leader, Demestic Leader, y'no, people with a council vote!!
Maybe the 1 only rule should appy for members of the executive but not senators or congress members??

 

[Eklektikos]

I like the proposed double standard system as a temporary measure to increase participation amongst newcomers. It's both fair and reasonably elegant.

However I do not think this should be anything more than a temporary measure for the rest of the duration of this game. I believe that the ultimate answer to this problem will be the implementation of cyclical elections, as has been discussed previously. I hope that the mechanics of this will be a priority for discussion once the current demogame is over.

 

[Shaitan]

Originally posted by Almightyjosh
sorry, I was using 'leaders' as short for Millitary leader, Demestic Leader, y'no, people with a council vote!!
Maybe the 1 only rule should appy for members of the executive but not senators or congress members??

Oh, right. I should have realized that. *smack's forehead*

Congress members wouldn't be affected as they're not leaders. Senators (governors) definitely would. They're incumbent leaders. On an individual basis a governor is more powerful than some of the council seats.

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

Keep in mind also that "leader" is formally defined in the introduction to our Constitution:

Leader – Colloquial expression for the President, head of a Department, member of the Judiciary or a Provincial Governor

 

[Strider]

I wonder... am I a "Big Name" or not?

Actually I liked the old rule that you can only run for two poistions. I liked last term(or is it still this term?) were I was/am Vice President and Science Leader.

 

[Shaitan]

Originally posted by Strider
I wonder... am I a "Big Name" or not?

Strider

Yup

 

[Strider]

No I'm not!! because some of my posts have

~Strider~

Now really... do you guys consider me a BIG NAME or not?

 

[Cyc]

You're right Almightyjosh. Let's make a new rule where Governors can only run for one position. Those darn incumbents have too much power during elections. Has anyone considered changing the term limits Article?

 

[Cyc]

Damn, it got quiet in here.

BTW, my mistake. It's not an Article, it's Section G, point 5 of the COS.

 

[Octavian X]

Unless you get second place, losers of a race get nothing. I'd propose making anyone who got below second place become the chat representive for that department. Then again, we would need to add Deputy Governors and chat reps. for provinces.
I think that would encourage more running for positions because you'd be guarenteed to get A position.

 

[disorganizer]

I wonder when the firs province will come up with a "province council". I would like to see 3+governor try to do council-votes in province matters and a minimum of 1 of them being in the threads! The constitution would at the moment allow any governor to proclaim this, as he could have 3 chat representatives if he likes and he can decide his decission making as he likes also.
Same with mayors... maybe sometime a mayor will set his position on open election among his citizens?

but on the other hand, do we really have enough willing to be elected citizens?

 

[Octavian X]

We don't even have enough people to fill the gubenatorial positions. New Cormyr, Scythia, and Mohawkia currently have nobody running for governor.

 

[donsig]

Originally posted by Cyc
When people like me (I'm not a big name)...

Cyc, we're not talking about the number of letters in your name. We're talking about name recognition. You do tend to confuse us with the Cyc/sike thing but basically, in Phoenatica, you are a big name.

That said, I do hope we are not considering changing the election rules now that the nominations have begun. I think that would be akin to changing a poll once it is initiated.

I doubt the numbers of positions one could run for will dent the big name syndrome. Every other term we held elections where anyone could run for two positions. Nominees still refused to run against big names, to the point where some elections were uncontested (i.e., no runner-up in the election and no elected deputy). I say take the nomination against the so called big name. You may just end up as a deputy and get a big name for yourself. No one is born with a big name - it must be made. In term two I was a little name who ran against the incumbent domestic leader, eyrei. I lost but became deputy. Eyrei was also VP. He became president when Grey Fox resigned and I moved on up the food chain (i.e., got a bigger name). Disorganizer is one of the 'big names' yet he's never been in an election! Your name is made based on what you do for Phoenatica so I would be against the double standard suggested in this thread.

I would also point out that having a person in more than one election will affect citizens' voting strategies.

I think we should explore the cyclical election angle and keep in mind that during a term vacancies arise and any unemployed big names may well end up with a government job anyway.

 

[Octavian X]

I am no big name. I was appointed governer to a small, completely unsignificant province. But here I am, running completely unopposed for trade leader. I really don't know what to make of that.

 

[Lovro]

Originally posted by Octavian X
I'd propose making anyone who got below second place become the chat representive for that department.

This could result in a number of self-nominated 1-vote-in-elections chat representatives.

 

[Almightyjosh]

Originally posted by Cyc
You're right Almightyjosh. Let's make a new rule where Governors can only run for one position. Those darn incumbents have too much power during elections. Has anyone considered changing the term limits Article?

Thanks for the support Cyc, but this is the opposite of what I was saying (I can sound confused I'll grant you). I was saying council members should only get 1 only, but citizens ans Governors get to accept 2 nominations (obviously I have an angle here!!)

btw disorganiser, I was toying with the idea last night (it kept me up thinking) of holding in-province votes in the style of a council vote. Not a poll, but a thread where you can check WHO is voting. I couldn't think of any to run, but I think I will implement this next term

(assuming:
A: I am re-elected
B: I still have some citizens left and they don't all become governors!!
C: Shaitan says I can )

 

[Cyc]

So no one liked the idea of making term limits of 1 to 2 months for any government position in a game? If the big names had to keep changing jobs every one or two months, don't you think positions would open up? Or are we afraid to try this? I think it would solve a lot of the problems mentioned here and cut down on future problems. No more ball-hogging. Keep the people rotating and learn who the candidates are. Learn to vote wisely based on short histories.