Welcome Guest
[Log In]
[Register]
- Lazarus
- →
- Archives
- →
- Archives
- →
- PRL Archives
- →
- Constitutional Convention 2015
- →
- Proposal to Grant Voting Rights to Long Term Residents
| Welcome to the forums of the Undead Dominion of Lazarus. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features |
| Proposal to Grant Voting Rights to Long Term Residents | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 24 2015, 11:34 PM (417 Views) | |
| Kazmr | Apr 24 2015, 11:34 PM Post #1 |
Lazarene
|
I'm making this a separate thread because I don't think its really getting proper discussion buried at the bottom of the constitutional draft. I've made it clear that I believe that we should seriously consider giving residents of the gameside region a voice in the actual running, without necessarily requiring them to join the forum. A number of long term residents played a part, whether it was offering to be an endorsement target or simply draining substantial amounts of Stujenske's influence, and I think there needs to be a reward for that, even if they don't necessarily play the game our way. Thus, I have created a proposal that would allow long term residents of the region to have a real stake in regional affairs. Who would be potentially eligible? Individuals who are among the 300 longest consecutive residents in the region, and potentially those granted the right by vote of the legislature (for instance someone who would have been in this category were it not for a coup ejecting them) How do we prevent manipulation? First off, an individual must be currently in the World Assembly and endorsing the delegate. This helps ensure 'one person, one vote'. Second off, to vote for anything, they must have been ELIGIBLE throughout the entire course of discussion for it, from first proposal to the actual vote being passed or rejected. Thus, the nation must have been in the WA and endorsing the delegate when a bill first has a thread created in congress, throughout all discussion, and until the vote closes. To vote for an elected official, they must have been eligible and endorsing when nominations first opened, or something similar. Thus, anyone who wanted to maintain a sleeper in the region to have voting power would not only have to wait a year, they would have to continuously maintain an endorsement on the delegate in case some bill arose. I find it hard to imagine that someone would be dedicated enough to permanently park their WA here, but go short of the forums itself, just to manipulate the region. Finally, we can extend criminal prosecution to these individuals. If they break the regional law, they lose their right to vote and face ejection. This one may be a bit tricker to enforce, I will admit, and I welcome proposals to help ensure it. How would we know who is eligible? I have already written a short script that quickly identifies those nations meeting the conditions. It would be a very simple matter to maintain a table in a database that is added to daily with nations eligible on that day, and a simple front end to easily access records for any day. How do we keep these people from overruling the forum every time? IF you take a look at this post, I demonstrated that there are currently 17 nations in the region who would be eligible under the proposal here (300 nations). This corresponds to roughly a year in the region. A handful of those are defender sleepers active in present operations. I think that it is reasonably to expect that many of these nations would not vote. Thus, this is not an absolutely overwhelming number of voters, nor will it be logistically unwieldy. How do we keep them informed I have two separate ideas on that. One would be to maintain a dispatch with bills or officials currently up for vote, and a list of the nations eligible on it, as well as a nation to TG votes to. They can also TG someone with their intent to run for election if we so chose to grant that right. The other would be to telegram eligible nations whenever something goes up to vote. As the number is not really that high, I don't think that this would be a logistical nightmare. Further, it would be possible to create some sort of auto-TG tool using the API to inform eligible nations of votes. I am willing to publicly post any of the code used to maintain such a system so that it does not die with me. IT is also possible to keep the constitutional language enabling this system vague on the technical mechanics so as to not be locked into this specific flow. I welcome disagreement (or maybe even agreement), and would like suggestions. |
 |
 
|
| Cormac | Apr 24 2015, 11:45 PM Post #2 |
Lazarene
|
I think it's a good idea to extend participation to longtime natives, but I don't think your proposal goes far enough to prevent manipulation. It isn't difficult to maintain a non-WA nation in a region, and if one is only required to have WA from the time legislation is proposed until the vote concludes, I can see people being willing to do that in order to manipulate the region's democratic process. I think this should only be extended to longtime WA residents who are endorsing the Delegate. As in, only residents who have a) continually been in the region, b) continually been in the WA, c) continually endorsed the Delegate (within reason, accounting for transitions), for the same length of time. I would suggest requiring one year of prior WA residency in the region. There are potentially still people who would plant a WA nation here for that long -- Neenee's and JAL's WA nations have been known to go "missing" for extended periods of time -- but there are so few people who would do that, that I don't think it's a major concern. Obviously anyone whose WA residency is unjustly interrupted -- like during the recent coup -- should, as you say, be considered to have been a WA resident for the length of the coup as well. It wasn't their fault they were ejected. |
|
|
|
| Kazmr | Apr 24 2015, 11:53 PM Post #3 |
|
Lazarene
|
If that's your only objection, cormac, I think it would certainly be possible to implement. At the very least a quick crosscheck from NSHistory would let us ensure that they've maintained continuous WA up until we have full fleshed logs for a year. |
|
|
|
| Cormac | Apr 25 2015, 12:15 AM Post #4 |
|
Lazarene
|
That's my only objection, really. I think there's still some small measure of risk involved, but only a small one that is worth it to enfranchise longtime, dedicated natives. |
|
|
|
| Benevolent Thomas | Apr 25 2015, 02:23 AM Post #5 |
Blessed of the Vale
|
I just don't see why they can't make a forum account. I mean they don't even have to be active forum participants. Just apply for citizenship and log in when its been announced that there is a vote going on. You see a long-time citizen and I see a long-time apathetic resident. "ugh, I gotta click one one extra link to have my voice heard? Nah, I'm cool just answering my issues..." |
|
|
|
| Ivo | Apr 25 2015, 03:01 AM Post #6 |
|
Lazarene
|
I agree with the sentiments of BT. I wouldn't use the word "dedicated" to describe the majority of long-term Lazarene natives. Most, if not all, are content with answering issues and voting in the WA. |
|
|
|
| Cormac | Apr 25 2015, 04:13 AM Post #7 |
|
Lazarene
|
Some people just don't want to get involved on off-site forums. They enjoy limiting their involvement in NationStates to, well, NationStates. It's a valid way to play the game and I don't think they should be viewed as not dedicated just because they prefer to play that way. And to be blunt, someone whose WA is stationed in this region for years but never registers on an off-site has the potential to be a lot more valuable to the region during a time of crisis than an off-site forum citizen whose puppet in Lazarus never sees WA membership. Are some on-site residents apathetic? Yes. But not all. We just saw longtime on-site residents get involved in the counter-coup effort. Those people are obviously dedicated, and enfranchising them and letting them be involved without having to join and participate in an off-site forum might even increase their dedication further. Lazarus would be much better off if all residents are more attuned to what's going on and have more of a stake in the government of the region, because they will care more if that government is overthrown. It won't just be one Delegate from one off-site community overthrowing another, with no real effect on them, it will be a rogue Delegate overthrowing their Delegate. Giving on-site residents more of a stake and more fully integrating the on-site and off-site community is good for the entire region. |
|
|
|
| Kazmr | Apr 25 2015, 08:33 AM Post #8 |
|
Lazarene
|
To build off of Cormac, calling people lazy or apathetic I think seriously misrepresents them. They proved their dedication to Lazarus during recent events. Trackeendy, for instance, and others offering to be endorsement targets knowing they could get banned. Others vocally on the RMB day in and out. The people who would be enfranchised by this system are those who, first of all, contribute endorsements for the long term, something we all agree is vital to keeping our government together but which many, many citizens dont provide who just prticipate on the forum. They provide checks against coups like the recent one. Just because they dont subscribe to our narrow view of 'playing the game' doesnt mean they dont deaerve a stake in the system. |
|
|
|
| Gulliver | Apr 25 2015, 11:44 AM Post #9 |
Lazarene
|
The mechanism for identifying who's eligible seems clear enough, but what's the mechanism by which they could actually vote without coming to the forums? |
|
|
|
| Wopruthien | Apr 25 2015, 11:44 AM Post #10 |
|
Newbie
|
I'd say a year for WA residency endorsing the various delegates they should have a say in legislation. They may or may not have any idea what they are voting on but should still be allowed to have a say. A lot of those not wanting to join Offsite forums are fearful who control the power here, and unsure how much personal details they will be revealing, IPs, Emails etc. |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Constitutional Convention 2015 · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
 3:10 PM Jul 12
|
Theme by Sith - Recolored by Seth of Outline