I completely agree.
I purposefully stayed out of the game to ensure my impartial dealings with people. I think the game was better because of it.
INFOMATIONAL: What Positions sould Mods be able to Hold?
- Thread starter Almightyjosh
- Start date
I completely agree.
I purposefully stayed out of the game to ensure my impartial dealings with people. I think the game was better because of it.
Incubus0223
UMM nothing
I think President and umm i abstain that sounds good, they are really cool people and if President is in of as President of the US i'm sure anyone could do a better job then dubya "no offense to republicans" and any type of Leader and Govener i voted for also
chiefpaco
Emperor
I voted for everything but Public Defender and Judge Advocate (and Abstain). This was a difficult decision.
First, the allowing of positions. I think they should be (constitutionally) allowed because, IMHO:
- Inclusion and participation is important to me and restrictions detract from the game.
- It may be tried. If all goes wrong, we can disallow it, but I have faith it will work. I think the forum is a suitable place for us to find out if mods are acting above their powers.
- Mods must still win the election with the citizens knowing they are mods - another possible hurdle.
- Setting build queues? Make a science queue? I think these are tasks mods can do, if they wish.
- President? Sure. After all, the President really only plays the games and breaks ties. I see the smallest potential for conflict here.
The 2 Judiciary positions is where I am a bit more wary. This is where the game gets a bit personal. I do not strongly object, but I think it might be better if the mods stayed out of this one. Perhaps even Chief Justice... (BTW, it was spelled wrong in the poll...)
I am also wary of many of the many valid concerns expressed by the citizens thus far. However, I believe many of them to be concerns, and not enough reasons for me to say that we should restrict.
Best of luck to the mods!
cp
First, the allowing of positions. I think they should be (constitutionally) allowed because, IMHO:
- Inclusion and participation is important to me and restrictions detract from the game.
- It may be tried. If all goes wrong, we can disallow it, but I have faith it will work. I think the forum is a suitable place for us to find out if mods are acting above their powers.
- Mods must still win the election with the citizens knowing they are mods - another possible hurdle.
- Setting build queues? Make a science queue? I think these are tasks mods can do, if they wish.
- President? Sure. After all, the President really only plays the games and breaks ties. I see the smallest potential for conflict here.
The 2 Judiciary positions is where I am a bit more wary. This is where the game gets a bit personal. I do not strongly object, but I think it might be better if the mods stayed out of this one. Perhaps even Chief Justice... (BTW, it was spelled wrong in the poll...)
I am also wary of many of the many valid concerns expressed by the citizens thus far. However, I believe many of them to be concerns, and not enough reasons for me to say that we should restrict.
Best of luck to the mods!
cp
Almightyjosh
Governor in Waiting
I think I will have to contradict that...
In a poll such as this, abstaining is almost the same as not voting at all. This poll works on the (safe) assumption that the citizens will vote for 'some positions', thus there is not an option to vote 'no positions' even if that's what you think.
When working out how many votes a position needs to pass, one takes the total number of votes and subtracts the number of abstains. Counting abstains in the way Shaitan descripes would be counting them as a 'no' vote, which is not allowable given the results of prior polling.
In fact, in a multichoice, non-official poll with no option to vote 'no' (such as this poll is) the Abstain option serves only to satify the COS which states an Abstain must be included.
Cyc
Looking for the door...
So, basically AJ, you're saying that the ABSTAIN option is a useless one and just as valid an option as if ABSTAIN were not even listed. The only reason you put the nonsensical option in was because of the standard you referred to.
I hate to do this...but here goes. I have to disagree with you. In this poll, ABSTAIN does not mean NO POSITIONS, it means the voter could not or did not want to express their choice(s). All ABSTAIN votes should not be subtracted from the voting total, but included in that total. They are votes.
I hate to do this...but here goes. I have to disagree with you. In this poll, ABSTAIN does not mean NO POSITIONS, it means the voter could not or did not want to express their choice(s). All ABSTAIN votes should not be subtracted from the voting total, but included in that total. They are votes.
This poll promised to be a beast to interpret anyway, but them someone went and voted for Chief Justice AND abstain! There are only 22 people that voted, but 15 votes for Chief Justice and 8 abstain which obviously equals 23. I think that makes sense anyway...
Cyc
Looking for the door...
Correct, eyrei. I think Shaitan already addressed that. The person basically lessened the value of their vote for CJ by also voting ABSTAIN.
Almightyjosh
Governor in Waiting
I agree. They are counted in exactly this way.
However, as this is an informational poll, there is no quorum, so it does not matter how many people vote, thus abstaining means very little.
chiefpaco
Emperor
AJ, I think Abstain means a lot more in a multi-choice poll. If I understand your approach, the majority of non-"abstain" voters is needed to pass. However, I think you block an important motion of democracy - polls with low support.
Pretend there were 3 votes for each position and 19 abstains. What would that say to the validity of the poll, especially an informational one? Basically, the vast majority of the citizens either think the poll is invalid, wrong, or not-representative. If you ignore the abstains by your model, every position would pass with an 100% approval. I hope you can see the problems with ignoring the "abstain" option, especially in a multi-choice poll.
If I were to run a multi-choice poll, I would take the total voters, in this case, it is now 22. Then make each choice fight a 50% approval (i.e. 11 or more). Therefore, you know that the majority of the citizens voted for each option (provided no one voted for something AND abstain). Therefore, people have the chance to still reject the proposal.
This contrasts a single-choice poll. There, options may pass despite not receiving a > 50% acceptance but when the vote ends. For example, if this were a single-choice poll, people would think that Mods could hold a Chief Justice position with only a 13% approval vote.
Did I make the point clear?
Another point I wish to make is that we don't seem to be changing anything yet. Should I expect to see an actual change made?
Lastly, I'm surprised about the voting here. I seemed to have voted in the opposite manner to the majority. I'll go check where my head is at.
Pretend there were 3 votes for each position and 19 abstains. What would that say to the validity of the poll, especially an informational one? Basically, the vast majority of the citizens either think the poll is invalid, wrong, or not-representative. If you ignore the abstains by your model, every position would pass with an 100% approval. I hope you can see the problems with ignoring the "abstain" option, especially in a multi-choice poll.
If I were to run a multi-choice poll, I would take the total voters, in this case, it is now 22. Then make each choice fight a 50% approval (i.e. 11 or more). Therefore, you know that the majority of the citizens voted for each option (provided no one voted for something AND abstain). Therefore, people have the chance to still reject the proposal.
This contrasts a single-choice poll. There, options may pass despite not receiving a > 50% acceptance but when the vote ends. For example, if this were a single-choice poll, people would think that Mods could hold a Chief Justice position with only a 13% approval vote.
Did I make the point clear?
Another point I wish to make is that we don't seem to be changing anything yet. Should I expect to see an actual change made?
Lastly, I'm surprised about the voting here. I seemed to have voted in the opposite manner to the majority. I'll go check where my head is at.
Almightyjosh
Governor in Waiting
CP, the fact that abstain is treated in this way is not usual, it is symptomatic of a number of unusual things coming together.
Firstly, people MUST choose one of the options. Voteing 'none of these' is NOT an option, as a prior poll has already confirmed that AT LEAST ONE of these options must pass, ie at least one position must be open to mods. Secondly, the list here is exhaustive, there is no 'other' option as all the leader positions are represented.
It sounds undemocratic to force people to choose an option from the above when their opinion may be that mods should hold no position. However, this is only due to the OVERWHELMING result of the prior poll.
So, it is a requirement that the abstains be removed from the total. This is specific to this poll, and is not an idea that extends to all multi-choice polls.
Oh, and this poll is informational. The results of this and another couple of polls will be combined toform a final, binding poll to be ratified by all the citizens.
Firstly, people MUST choose one of the options. Voteing 'none of these' is NOT an option, as a prior poll has already confirmed that AT LEAST ONE of these options must pass, ie at least one position must be open to mods. Secondly, the list here is exhaustive, there is no 'other' option as all the leader positions are represented.
It sounds undemocratic to force people to choose an option from the above when their opinion may be that mods should hold no position. However, this is only due to the OVERWHELMING result of the prior poll.
So, it is a requirement that the abstains be removed from the total. This is specific to this poll, and is not an idea that extends to all multi-choice polls.
Oh, and this poll is informational. The results of this and another couple of polls will be combined toform a final, binding poll to be ratified by all the citizens.
Cyc
Looking for the door...
AJ - I think it's stated in the Constitution that citizens can't be forced or coerced to vote against their will (something to that effect). Therefore, you can not limit any citizens to voting that the Mods must be given a position if they don't feel this way. If they want to abstain, which is their right, they can. No one should be able to discount their votes. I still say the abstains should be added to the total.
Almightyjosh
Governor in Waiting
Cyc, I think we totally agree but are not communicating well.
'Goal Number' is the number of votes needed for any one option to pass. 'Goal number' is defined as greater than half of the 'actual votes'. 'Actual votes' is defined as (in this case) the number of people who voted for any option other than abstain. 'Notional votes' is not (in this case) the same as 'actual votes' as it includes the abstain votes.
Yes, abstain votes count towards the 'notional vote' count (26)
But, they do not count towards the 'actual vote' count (16)
Could the person who voted for Cheif Justice AND abstain PLEASE PM me, it is ver important that you do so.
'Goal Number' is the number of votes needed for any one option to pass. 'Goal number' is defined as greater than half of the 'actual votes'. 'Actual votes' is defined as (in this case) the number of people who voted for any option other than abstain. 'Notional votes' is not (in this case) the same as 'actual votes' as it includes the abstain votes.
Yes, abstain votes count towards the 'notional vote' count (26)
But, they do not count towards the 'actual vote' count (16)
Could the person who voted for Cheif Justice AND abstain PLEASE PM me, it is ver important that you do so.
Shaitan
der Besucher
I think that the notional abstract is academic in this case. As the change required would be to the Constitution, a measure that does not have overwhelming support will not pass. Given the results of this poll, a proposal that includes anything other than the Justice positions will be stillborn.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked
- Poll
