Polling Standards Commission

[Eklektikos]

This citizen's organisation is committed to the creation of a set of universal standards for polls held within the Empire of Fanatika. I consider this to be a necessary endeavour, given the arguments that have arisen over the format and content of a number of polls in the none too distant past.

Memberlist:
Eklektikos
Disorganizer
Cyc
Donsig
Shaitan
Bill_in_PDX
Immortal
Almightyjosh

Please sign up, make your suggestions and let the debate begin in earnest!

 

[Eklektikos]

I would like to begin by making the following suggestions:

1. The actual poll questions to be posted in the discussion thread 24 hours before opening the poll. This will ensure that the choices offered to the people accurately reflect those arrived at in the debate
2. Use of the "other" option to be prohibited. If the issue has been properly discussed beforehand this option is redundant. If the issue HASN'T been sufficiently discussed beforehand then it isn't ready to be polled on.
   [/list=1]

 

[disorganizer]

next point:
* ABSTAIN should be in all polls as option. this would prevent citizens from not being able to vote because "their" option is not there.
* minimum length of 24 hours. this will allow most citizens to poll, even if absent for 1 day
* im in pro of the other-option, because maybe something important was missed. other should always contain the "please state below" text. only if there we will see if something has been properly discussed before the poll
* start- and enddate should be posted
* binding- or not-binding should be stated
* mandatory link to the coresponding disdussion thread is a must

 

[Cyc]

Sign me up, Eklektikos. I like the idea of eliminating the "other" option as its principle is clear and true to the nature of polling. Good suggestion. Abstain will work for citizens who can't make up their mind.

I believe there are many different aspects of poll procedures to consider. From simple mechanics to more complex discussions. At this time I would like to re-post my original proposal on poll procedures, just to have it here for consideration (or even a complete over-haul).

At this time, no real proposals have been brought forward, although I have made quite a few suggestions. If we, as a nation, can agree on a fairly simple rule about what is required for a poll and what does a poll require us to do, then the problem will be initially resolved. This rule should be entered into the constitution as an amendment, approved by the Cabinet. This does not mean that the rule cannot be altered in the future by another discussion/poll/Cabinet vote. Our citizens may find a better path to take in creating polls. But let us start now, with a discussion.

IMO, a poll should be preceded by a discussion thread with the same heading or title as the poll. This discussion thread should not only originate but also be completed in its entirety in the same sub-forum as the poll. The discussion thread does not have a maximum length attached to it, but would have a minimum length of 24 hours. After 24 hours any citizen can post at the bottom of the discussion thread a request for a poll. If that request receives a second from another citizen, then that discussion can create a poll. The discussion creates the poll, not the person requesting a poll. The person requesting a poll can be the one to physically draw the poll up and list the options or they can request that some one else do it for them. Using decent ethics may require a discussion to be started between 1400 GMT and 0500 GMT. That point is very debatable, but would allow most citizens to become aware of the discussion and participate in it. Once the creation of the poll was seconded, it would be created with the same heading and the same sub-forum as the discussion thread. The poll would list unbiased all the options discussed or brought forward in the discussion thread. If a poll comes under criticism because it did not adhere to the standards, then any citizen can request a moderator to close the poll if it is deemed unconstitutional.

Thank you, Eklektikos, for starting this organisation. I hope many of our citizens participate, not just the people who will gain politically.

 

[donsig]

Please sign me up. I don't have much in the way of specific proposals right now what with the election and all.

I would like to point out that with the short time between turns we do not always have time for a discussion and a poll. Some decisions must be made quickly and I do not think we should prohibit quick decision making via polls.

 

[disorganizer]

not much activity here? why not!

 

[Shaitan]

Originally posted by disorganizer
not much activity here? why not!

'Cause I didn't see the thread!

I agree in principle to most of what's been stated so far. Some differences are that I would not make poll procedures an amendment. We're moving to a more standard (real world) constitution and laws. Poll procedures would most likely be a standard, perhaps a law at worst. I think Cyc posted the comment on making an amendment before the discussion on constitution revamp began so just consider my point here a clarification.

We either need loose guidelines or a set of 2 guidelines. Generally speaking, the outline that Cyc gave is what we want. We want good discussion followed by a poll proposal followed by the actual poll. We also need to anticipate quick polls, as donsig mentioned. Perhaps make results of quick polls temporary? By their nature they are for emergency conditions so just make those polls capable of handling the immediate emergency. Full discussion and a planned poll would then be held after the situation if a permanent solution was warranted.

I like "Other". No matter how long a topic is discussed and how well the discussion thread is promoted there will be people who miss it or abandon it. There should always be an opportunity for a write in vote when appropriate.

We can now have true popularity polls!!!!! This means we can give a list of all possible options and people can select as many of them as they like. This would be fantastic in elections. There are 3 candidates and you like 2 of them - pick them both! This would ensure that the truly most popular candidate is elected.

I agree that Abstain should absolutely be an option in every poll. This is critical if we wish to successfully implement quorums.

 

[Eklektikos]

So, to summarise those standards on which we currently appear to agree:

1. All polls to be preceded by a discussion thread
2. Discussion threads to be open a minimum of 24 hours before the actual poll is considered
3. Proposal of poll options to be posted in discussion thread 24 hours before opening the poll
4. Start and end dates must be included in top post of all polls
5. Link to the relevant discussion thread must be included in the top post of all polls
6. "Abstain" option to be included in all polls
   [/list=1]
   If anyone opposes any one of the above items please post and say so.
   This list (minus those items that receive opposition) will be displayed in the top post from tomorrow afternoon (GMT). As this thread goes on I will continue to add standards on which consensus has been achieved to this list. Eventually I aim to have compiled a coherent set of rules for polling which can be presented as an act of law (or whatever is appropriate to the political system current at that point). Keeping this list up to date should help to ensure that the discussion continues to move forward in a more ordered manner than previous debates on this subject.

 

[disorganizer]

i would also add:
4a) type of poll must be added in first post

i would propose a minimum of:
informational and official

and maybe we could implement a shortcut-letter in the name of the poll, like I: and O: and then the poll-name.
the "war!" poll would then for example be titled "I: war!". A departmental poll would be "O: what tech to research next?"

 

[Shaitan]

I like the I and O idea but it's not too intuitive for people less familiar with the rules. Maybe "Info Poll: War!" and "Official Poll: blah blah blah"?

Any comments on the temporary effects for quick polls idea?

 

[Eklektikos]

Originally posted by disorganizer
i would also add:
4a) type of poll must be added in first post

i would propose a minimum of:
informational and official

and maybe we could implement a shortcut-letter in the name of the poll, like I: and O: and then the poll-name.
the "war!" poll would then for example be titled "I: war!". A departmental poll would be "O: what tech to research next?"

The idea is to add items as we go. Since this particular point is still under debate it should be added later once we've actually come up with a final uncontested standard for it. In that list I just wanted to set out what we'd agreed so far.

 

[Shaitan]

I'm fine with the time restrictions, provided we also develop a procedure for emergencies.

 

[Eklektikos]

Originally posted by Shaitan
Any comments on the temporary effects for quick polls idea?

I like this idea, actually. My main problem with some of the speedier polls of the past was that they could affect permanent and fundamental changes to the game without the level of discussion such changes always warrant. I definitely think we should explore the possibilities of having "Temporary Measure" polls. I'd suggest that they should always have the "Measure Expiry Date" specified in the top post to make it clear when normal operation will resume. I'd also suggest that the results should only be valid if one option has a significant lead over the others - ie 2/3 of the vote or something along those lines, as well as some kind of quorum rule. I think controversy and accusations could well ensue if we took a major decision based on a speedy poll where the option that won did so by only one vote. Even more so if only 3 people actually voted!

Edit: "Measure Expiry Date" could be any in game event that is certain to happen, ie: when something is built, when a certain agreement expires, when we reach a specific game turn, etc...

 

[Eklektikos]

by the way, Shaitan: consider yourself signed up!

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

Please sign me up as well.

Bill
...in PDX

 

[Immortal]

I wish to join

 

[Cyc]

Eklektikos - I like the initial proposal you posted this morning, but I think #3 should be changed to read "Proposal of all options discussed in the discussion thread are to be posted in the same discussion thread 24 hours before opening the poll. Options discussed after the proposal is posted will go on the next proposal/poll.

This will eliminate last minute, undiscussed options and options taken from other threads (unseen perhaps by the readers) from being entered into the current proposal/poll. If someone would like to link another discussion thread to the discussion thread creating the poll, that discussion should be linked and discussed before the proposal includes these options.

 

[donsig]

I apologize for not having any specific proposals but I think we must take into consideration that there are different reasons for conducting polls and so all polls should not be held to the same 'rules'.

Some polls are strictly procedural, like those for renaming a city at the start of a governor's term. Some polls are posted by department leaders to feel out the citizens' general views, and the FA country ranking polls exemplify these. Then there are polls for specific proposals, like the worker proposal poll posted by Chieftess. then there are rule change polls. Should these all be lumped together under one standard?

 

[Eklektikos]

Ok, in response to Cyc's post I'm taking item 3 off the list since it evidently needs further discussion.

 

[Eklektikos]

Originally posted by donsig
I apologize for not having any specific proposals but I think we must take into consideration that there are different reasons for conducting polls and so all polls should not be held to the same 'rules'.

Some polls are strictly procedural, like those for renaming a city at the start of a governor's term. Some polls are posted by department leaders to feel out the citizens' general views, and the FA country ranking polls exemplify these. Then there are polls for specific proposals, like the worker proposal poll posted by Chieftess. then there are rule change polls. Should these all be lumped together under one standard?

This is a good point, but I think that a well constructed set of universal standards could encompass all of these polls and make it unnecessary to pigeonhole each poll into a certain classification before knowing what rules apply to it.

Undiscussed polls posted to feel out the general views of the populace could easily be dealt with since they're the kind of poll that should be non-binding. If we formally adopted universal standards, it would simply be stipulated that any poll not conforming to those standards is in no way binding. This would suit the nature of such polls

"Specific proposals" are always discussed before the poll is posted and since the options are just to accept or reject, the proposal becomes the poll option which would therefore have been up for discussion for the required time. These polls should also easily fit within the bounds set by the other standards, IMO

I don't see "Rule Change" polls as needing a diferent set of polling standards to gameplay polls.

Admittedly the "governor renaming city" kind of poll is more problematic, but I'm sure they could fit in too... it's just that at 2:20am my brain can't work out how!