Unofficial/Opinion Election Polls

Kloreep · July 6, 2002, 18:45

I personally am against them (If you don't know what I'm talking about, see this thread). No offense, jdd, but I don't see the point and I think they could influence the actual election.

But should they be allowed? (In short, should we have an amendment against this kind of poll?) Perhaps Spiffor's idea:

Quote:

I think we should make it a rule : no gallup polls during the week before the elections. This way, we won't confuse people with 2 polls on the same issue.

Or should they be allowed to proceed however, whenever? Outlawed completely? What do you think?

Schee · July 6, 2002, 18:52

Hmm... I don't think these polls could influence the election, IMO they are only useless, but they could be allowed, I dont see any problem... if some people want to have them...

Fatwreck · July 6, 2002, 18:52

I think this calls for a poll... and BTW I´m against it (Unofficial/Opinion Election Polls that is)...

notyoueither · July 6, 2002, 18:57

I think they could very well effect elections. For one, they will effect the behaviour of candidates in many cases.

One solution is for every fair minded individual to post stating they lied in their vote so the poll is useless, but still that could have an effect on the election. A better way might be for all these people to post 'abstaining' messages. Let the candidates know there are a large number of uncounted votes and that the race is far from decided.

Epistax · July 6, 2002, 18:58

There are only two stances to take. Either you can feel they are useless, or you can think they negatively impact polls. Besides that, you're kidding yourself.

Polls on anything else should probably be allowed, and we should ignore them if they aren't interesting.

Sheik · July 7, 2002, 11:09

what ever happened to free speech and democracy. We must allow opinion polls. You just cant silence people because you don't like what they are saying. This is part of the process. Maybe we should just get rid of campaign threads because they might influence the election. This is ridiculous. Of course we should allow UNOFFICIAL polls this is a democracy game and the poeple must be heard.

And so what if they may effect elections. I dont think they will but if they do who cares. If I post a thread saying NINOT RULES that may influence elections. Should I not be able to say NINOT RULES because someones vote may be influenced?

jdd2007 · July 7, 2002, 11:10

i strongly disagree with you on this. they do not have an impact on real elections, and should be allowed...

jdd2007 · July 7, 2002, 11:12

to sheik

Spiffor · July 7, 2002, 11:20

Sheik : there are much better ways than unofficial polls to hear the citizens :
- elections. They happen often enough for the people in charge to listen at the citizens.
- posting in threads. Most active members post in threads, and voice their opinions. People in charge are often the most involved in the game, and they read almost everything that is written.

I really believe polls do influence elections, by influencing the candidates to have an unnatural behaviour, and by letting people think an election is already played (IRL, the 2 last presidential elections in France showed how much polls can influence the voters).

Given there is a debate, I'll post an unofficial poll about this, to prepare an amendment if needed.

Sheik · July 7, 2002, 11:20

By the way Kloreep if you are against this kind of thing then why did you post this thread. THIS THREAD IS AN UNOFFICIAL OPINION THREAD. Your title even says:

Unofficial/Opinion Election Polls

And probably within a week there will be an official vote on this.

Spiffor · July 7, 2002, 11:35

Poll posted here

Epistax · July 7, 2002, 12:36

Freedom of speech != freedom of stupidity.

If something has no purpose, then an attack against it is not against speech, it's against spam, against solicitation, such as banning a particular kind of advertising. No freedom of speech is being violated. You do NOT have the right to pitch a sale to someone that is not interest. That's disturbing the peace and being a public nuisance.

*caugh*

----

decided to add a reminder that it doesn't _really_ matter, just I'd rather not see any pre-poll-polls because they cannot help our democratic process.
peace

Sheik · July 7, 2002, 13:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Epistax

Freedom of speech != freedom of stupidity

No freedom of speech is being violated. You do NOT have the right to pitch a sale to someone that is not interest. That's disturbing the peace and being a public nuisance.

Actually in the Unites States you do have the right to pitch sales to people who are not interested or may not be interested. It is not disturbing the peace.

Check out the Supreme Court decision
No. 001737. Argued February 26, 2002 Decided June 17, 2002

You can find that one at http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bi...&invol=00-1737

Also in the United States telemarketing isn't illegal. Freedom of Speech does mean freedom to stupidity because you cant decide what is stupid and what isn't. These are called opinions and although you may think that all the ones that aren't yours are bad this doesn't give anyone the right to silence them.

Spiffor · July 7, 2002, 14:38

Sheik :
Do you really think jdd's poll is about freedom of speech ? I must have missed something. What Jdd said, he could have said it in other threads, which aren't as debated.
I absolutely don't see what banning pre election polls has to do with freedom of speech. Please enlighten me

Sheik · July 7, 2002, 15:30

Pre election polls are a type of freedom of speech. It is the right of jdd2007 to poll and say whatever he wants. The Bill of Rights is a fairly small document and jdd's right to poll would be protected under the first amendment. The link to the case I posted above was won because of freedom of speech and not because of some solicitation law.

And I understand that this game is completely seperate from any other government and we are making our own rules here. These debates are important because they help us shape our government. However I do beleive that this may just be the beginning.

punkbass2000 · July 7, 2002, 15:38

This isn't the US.

Panag · July 7, 2002, 15:57

hi ,

why create more poll's , its allready a huge forum , so why not keep it simple and put a hold or a limit , ...

have a nice day

Sheik · July 7, 2002, 16:07

I think what we need is sub forums.

notyoueither · July 7, 2002, 16:30

We aren't going to get them.

Jon Shafer · July 7, 2002, 16:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Sheik
I think what we need is sub forums.

I've asked Markos twice, no response.

Panag · July 7, 2002, 16:39

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither
We aren't going to get them.

hi ,

we need to ask again , who knows , maybe the gods are pleased with our banana's , ....

it would , could make some thinks easy , ...

but how to make them , ..

, what goes here , what goes there , ....

have a nice day

Kloreep · July 7, 2002, 18:49

Quote:

By the way Kloreep if you are against this kind of thing then why did you post this thread. THIS THREAD IS AN UNOFFICIAL OPINION THREAD.

Sheik, I never said I was against opinions or polls that are unofficial. I said I was against unofficial election polls.

Quote:

And probably within a week there will be an official vote on this.

That's why I started this thread.

I thought there should be some discussion before voting started.

Sheik · July 7, 2002, 20:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Kloreep

Sheik, I never said I was against opinions or polls that are unofficial. I said I was against unofficial election polls.

Your right you didn't. Sorry my mistake.

Verto · July 7, 2002, 22:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Epistax
Freedom of speech != freedom of stupidity.

If something has no purpose, then an attack against it is not against speech, it's against spam, against solicitation, such as banning a particular kind of advertising. No freedom of speech is being violated. You do NOT have the right to pitch a sale to someone that is not interest. That's disturbing the peace and being a public nuisance.

*caugh*

----

decided to add a reminder that it doesn't _really_ matter, just I'd rather not see any pre-poll-polls because they cannot help our democratic process.
peace

Freedom of speech is freedom of stupidity...I'm not sure if I should be offended by your comment or worried that you would make it.

I do have a right to pitch a sale to you unless there is a sign that says "No Solicitation".

Who are you to decide what does and does not have purpose? Maybe I feel that there is no purpose in having two political parties - does that mean we should get rid of them?

As far as not helping the democratic process, I believe the poll that was taken by the other thread pertaining to this matter will show what the citizens believe, and hopefully it will be the end of it.

BTW, I don't think a new thread should have been started to discuss this, because IMO it serves no purpose - therefore we must get rid of it, correct?

Either you don't live in America and have no respect/knowledge about it,, or you're a Democrat.

I may be preaching and ravings now, so I'll apologize.

Kloreep · July 7, 2002, 22:53

I agree with your point, Verto. Stupidity may be the price of freedom of speech, but if it is, it's a pretty low one. Besides, I'd like to think we're an intelligent lot.

Quote:

Either you don't live in America and have no respect/knowledge about it,, or you're a Democrat.

Ooohh. Take that back.

Ninot · July 7, 2002, 23:02

I do live in Canada, so I do have freedom of speach, but to all my North American brethern, i say.. hold on!

This site is based out of Greece, not USA. While my knowledge of Greece is substantially low at the moment, I know that atleast in this Demo game, the constitution decides whether something can be said or it cant be said.

Because, my NA brethern, your not in America anymore.

Your in Apolyton!

If you want absolute freedom of speach, uninfringed, then vote for it. Vote so that all polls may go up, and so that no thread may be closed.

However.

As this is the Independant nation of Apolyton, we NA brothers may not force our laws upon her. By immigrating to Apolyton, you have accepted her laws, and as a people, you have accepted the responsibilty to mold her laws as you see fit. Vote for your rights, or vote to silence the odd few who need say something that need not be said.

But don't infringe on the sovreign nation of Apolyton.

Verto · July 7, 2002, 23:53

Accepted her laws? Explain that to the thousands of illegal Mexicano "immigrants" pouring into TX,CA and the other border states...off topic, however.

I concur with what you say(most of it...)but is not Apolytonia a democracy? What true democracies have not allowed freedom of speech?

And I'm not sure if Canadians know what freedom is...fear the government that fears your guns, my northern neighbors. Same goes to Europe!

LordImpact · July 7, 2002, 23:57

I think we ALL need to stop compairing Apolytonia to ANY real country. And before you call me a Democrat, Verto, I'm not. I'm a registered Republican.

--Impact

notyoueither · July 8, 2002, 00:01

A agree about some of your opinions of the Canadian government Verto. OTOH, they are mostly a bunch of limp wrists who would never dare to challenge the people in such a way as to require guns. For the most part. And if they did... we have the largest gun market in the world just over the longest undefended border in the world (mostly undefended still).

As for Poly... It's more like an enlightened absolute monarchy with co rulers. What Markos and DanQ say is the law. There is no appeal beyond them.

BTW, the server is in Texas now. However, the US constitution only applies to the benefit of Markos and Dan. It is still their sand box and hence, their rules. Benevolent and tolerant though they may be.

Verto · July 8, 2002, 00:10

So let it be written, so let it be done...

And besides, there are always a bunch of gun-toting Texans to fight their wars for em!

It seems to be what Americans do best - going to get a lot of comments about that...haha.

And, as I said, Apolytonia is a democracy, hence my defense of freedom of speech. Perhaps I became overzealous in my defense of America - but any man who can't defend his country isn't a man, now is he?