Official Polling Standards - Page 2

Kuciwalker · June 17, 2002, 17:35

I especially like the 3 weeks limit. We keep having people try and repoll things we've already decided, which gets really annoying.

Sirotnikov · June 17, 2002, 17:40

I think there should be a non-political court body for that.

I do think we need to see some court to observe the democratic nature of the game.

3 people, chosen each month ...

Jon Shafer · June 17, 2002, 17:44

Like I've said, people who think one or two things ought to be changed (who should judge) can propose an amendment later on. With only 51% of people having to go for something, it will be very easy to change things (as it looks how it will end up).

Panag · June 17, 2002, 17:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
I think there should be a non-political court body for that.

I do think we need to see some court to observe the democratic nature of the game.

3 people, chosen each month ...

hi ,

, three is to little , it should be 5 , and they should stay a bit longer , because they shall have to learn , .....maybe some people who are willing to give their time for a long period , ....

have a nice day

Spiffor · June 17, 2002, 18:02

I strongly support Trip's clauses, as they come from common sense, and a will to make a little order in our chaos

notyoueither · June 17, 2002, 18:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip
And why would a Senate be any better than the current ministers as far as judging? They'd be people just like the ministers, there's no difference.

Hmmm. Ministers launch most polls. Ministers judging the validity of their own polls?

Polls started by citizens would often be because the citizens are p*ssed off about what the ministers are doing. Again, the ministers judge the validity of the poll?

Does the term conflict of interest mean anything to you? How about tyranny?

Panag · June 17, 2002, 18:26

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither

Hmmm. Ministers launch most polls. Ministers judging the validity of their own polls?

Polls started by citizens would often be because the citizens are p*ssed off about what the ministers are doing. Again, the ministers judge the validity of the poll?

Does the term conflict of interest mean anything to you? How about tyranny?

hi ,

, the senate , and this a sincere proposition , could work on his

have a nice day

Jon Shafer · June 17, 2002, 18:27

Where in there does it say that only ministers can post official polls? That only refers to things like Mobilization for War, etc. If you read the document exactly as I have phrased it, there is no restriction upon who can post a poll and who cannot. That means as many of the regular people can post polls as they want to, within the rules laid out. The only reason why ministers would have more polls is if they're active more and have more concerns, which is completely fair. A regular citizen can be as involved, or not as he wants.

Spiffor · June 17, 2002, 18:40

Currently, the polls about impeachment and amendment show the lead of the "anyone can post a poll about this" group. Both polls were posted by ministers (Timeline and myself).
Do we ministers really try to leave the citizens out of power ? Are we ministers all the same, trying to protect our petty interests as a cabinet ? I don't think so.

notyoueither · June 17, 2002, 18:49

No, no, no. Why are the powers that be avoiding the meaning of the words and skirting the issue?

Ministers will start most polls, that's due to their level of involvement. I said nowhere that the people would not start polls. In fact I said that the people are likely to start polls when they are p*ssed with the ministers.

Let me put it more clearly. Do you think that Nixon should have been the judge of his own actions and the actions of those who sought to impeach him?

Panag · June 17, 2002, 18:58

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither
No, no, no. Why are the powers that be avoiding the meaning of the words and skirting the issue?

Ministers will start most polls, that's due to their level of involvement. I said nowhere that the people would not start polls. In fact I said that the people are likely to start polls when they are p*ssed with the ministers.

Let me put it more clearly. Do you think that Nixon should have been the judge of his own actions and the actions of those who sought to impeach him?

hi ,

, right , but imagine some people start to impeach , just for let's say , "i dont like your face" or so , ....
before one should really go ahead with the impeachment , things should be sorted out .

have a nice day

Jon Shafer · June 18, 2002, 00:20

Bump.

Gotta keep the thread on the first page for all those who haven't had a chance to see it (maybe some Euros). Not very fair if I let this thread fall off the first page and win that way, now is it?

MrWhereItsAt · June 18, 2002, 04:54

I think it's quite telling how outspoken the opponents to this are (eg me, civman, NYE), and how, despite a majority so far agreeing with this poll, therer are few posting in favour of it other than Trip (of course) and punkbass.

Can some more of the supporters put fingers to keyboard and let us know their reasons?

Jon Shafer · June 18, 2002, 15:48

Quite a majority too. Perhaps they just agree and don't really have anything else to say. So far all the people who support it have said is "good we need some rules", or other things to that extent.

Moral Hazard · June 18, 2002, 15:49

I support the senate Idea.

Jon Shafer · June 18, 2002, 20:40

Bump, yet again. This poll will soon expire, so I'm not going to bump it anymore. If it slides off the page again, then whatever results it finishes with I'm going to tell Linney to add to the Constitution.

ManicStarSeed · June 19, 2002, 18:56

Why not have (a group of 3?) called the pollsters, they would be resposibile for all official polls. They would be responsible for (in)validating the official poles....

sort of like a supreme court...

just my 2 cents...

Panag · June 19, 2002, 19:03

Quote:

Originally posted by ManicStarSeed
Why not have (a group of 3?) called the pollsters, they would be resposibile for all official polls. They would be responsible for (in)validating the official poles....

sort of like a supreme court...

just my 2 cents...

hi ,

sincere proposal , lets get a senate , they could be the court , and do the pole's , ...

have a nice day

Trevman · June 20, 2002, 20:16

Way too complicated.
How about something like this:

Polls should be open for a minimum of 3 days and closed in a timely manner.
Polls should include information about the matter polled in the first post.
No reference to a banana should be an option for a pol.

playshogi · June 21, 2002, 11:46

Maybe we should have a Republic Game where the ministers play the game as they fit and stand for election every so often. Also, when Multiplayer comes out... will it be possible to have a Republic game with 8-16 teams in one big game? Keeping your nation's strategy secret could be a problem, though.