Monthly Legislation Discussions

Kajan · Post by **Kajan** » Thu Mar 03, 2016 1:40 am

I thought there was already a requirement for voting outside of elections? If there isn't, I believe a rule should be made around certain people (wink wink) who never vote anything other than abstain, and never contribute to discussions surrounding laws.

Cormac · Post by **Cormac** » Thu Mar 03, 2016 7:10 am

Kajan wrote:Thu Mar 03, 2016 6:40 amI thought there was already a requirement for voting outside of elections? If there isn't, I believe a rule should be made around certain people (wink wink) who never vote anything other than abstain, and never contribute to discussions surrounding laws.

I'm going to have to disagree with this. I won't be voting for anything that might further reduce activity in the Deshret, or lower turnout in our elections. Our activity requirements are already too stringent in comparison to other Feeders and Sinkers and I don't think it would be at all healthy to make the Deshret even smaller and more exclusive than is already the case.

Something else we may want to discuss in regard to election law is doing away with plurality voting. As it stands, we could easily end up electing an official who has only a small plurality if there are several candidates in the race. This could be a particular problem in elections for Pharaoh, an official who definitely should have majority support as they will be serving as Delegate. We could achieve majority voting by going back to run-off elections -- though we switched to plurality to get rid of run-offs -- or by implementing ranked choice voting. My preference would be the latter.

Post by **Jakker** » Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:19 am

Added to the list. Thanks for the suggestion, Cormac!

Post by **Jakker** » Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:55 am

Still looking for more ideas

The more, the merrier!

Andrew · Post by **Andrew** » Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:31 pm

Cormac wrote:Thu Mar 03, 2016 12:10 pm
Kajan wrote:Thu Mar 03, 2016 6:40 amI thought there was already a requirement for voting outside of elections? If there isn't, I believe a rule should be made around certain people (wink wink) who never vote anything other than abstain, and never contribute to discussions surrounding laws.
I'm going to have to disagree with this. I won't be voting for anything that might further reduce activity in the Deshret, or lower turnout in our elections. Our activity requirements are already too stringent in comparison to other Feeders and Sinkers and I don't think it would be at all healthy to make the Deshret even smaller and more exclusive than is already the case.

Something else we may want to discuss in regard to election law is doing away with plurality voting. As it stands, we could easily end up electing an official who has only a small plurality if there are several candidates in the race. This could be a particular problem in elections for Pharaoh, an official who definitely should have majority support as they will be serving as Delegate. We could achieve majority voting by going back to run-off elections -- though we switched to plurality to get rid of run-offs -- or by implementing ranked choice voting. My preference would be the latter.

I'm not sure I'm familiar with this system in NS. What would be the pros and cons?

Post by **shetef** » Fri Mar 04, 2016 2:35 pm

Given the recent changes to SPDR ingame, I'm wondering if we want to re-evaluate the requirements for membership on the Atef.

Cormac · Post by **Cormac** » Fri Mar 04, 2016 6:42 pm

Blaine Zeorus Montresor wrote:Fri Mar 04, 2016 7:35 pmGiven the recent changes to SPDR ingame, I'm wondering if we want to re-evaluate the requirements for membership on the Atef.

Which requirements? As far as I know, we don't have any SPDR requirements at present.

Post by **shetef** » Fri Mar 04, 2016 7:02 pm

Cormac wrote:Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:42 pm
Blaine Zeorus Montresor wrote:Fri Mar 04, 2016 7:35 pmGiven the recent changes to SPDR ingame, I'm wondering if we want to re-evaluate the requirements for membership on the Atef.
Which requirements? As far as I know, we don't have any SPDR requirements at present.

Precisely. Do you think we should?

Post by **Jakker** » Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:05 pm

Blaine Zeorus Montresor wrote:Fri Mar 04, 2016 7:35 pmGiven the recent changes to SPDR ingame, I'm wondering if we want to re-evaluate the requirements for membership on the Atef.

Thanks for the idea, Zeo. Definitely something important to always think about. Added to the list.

Cormac · Post by **Cormac** » Sat Mar 05, 2016 3:21 am

Blaine Zeorus Montresor wrote:Sat Mar 05, 2016 12:02 am
Cormac wrote:Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:42 pm
Blaine Zeorus Montresor wrote:Fri Mar 04, 2016 7:35 pmGiven the recent changes to SPDR ingame, I'm wondering if we want to re-evaluate the requirements for membership on the Atef.
Which requirements? As far as I know, we don't have any SPDR requirements at present.
Precisely. Do you think we should?

Oh, I misunderstood your earlier post and thought you were suggesting revising existing requirements. I don't think we should, but it's a good idea for discussion and I'll be glad to discuss it further when the thread for that particular discussion is opened.