an Election time begging

Ninot · August 12, 2002, 20:29

PLEASE keep this off the front news page untill the elections are over.

very few of the votes matter, but for those who do, a 200 vote farce is not what we need, and id like to get some regularity to the elections, starting now, with less publicity.

GodKing · August 12, 2002, 20:34

As there isn't much competition in many of the elections, I doubt many people will come out of the woodworks.

Ninot · August 12, 2002, 20:38

Well, Uber has quite a few abstain votes in his election. what if the news page gets something on it... then that might not end as a clear victory, not if it follows last months presidential election.

i dont want to set a precedence where all elections are voted on by people who dont come to the forums. not advertising outside of this forum is the best way to do that.

notyoueither · August 12, 2002, 20:47

Not a bad idea Ninot.

I was quite surprised by the voters list last time. I had assumed some mischief had been done, but there was very little to indicate it from the list of who voted.

Still, it would be good to try to guard the integrity of the elections. Mischief is entirely too possible.

/Edit. I shouldn't have said 'nothing'. There was a very little bit. Many of the new user accounts who voted had no posts and similar styles of personal information. Nothing definite.

GePap · August 12, 2002, 20:52

Its weird- finaly, when parties have all but gone- it suddenly feels that I am voting in a one party state:

Choices: Candidate 1 or, Candidate 1. (I don't like to vote abstain out of spite).

We are going to try to either recruit more candidates next time around, or do some major reform.

Ninot · August 12, 2002, 20:56

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither
Not a bad idea Ninot.

I was quite surprised by the voters list last time. I had assumed some mischief had been done, but there was very little to indicate it from the list of who voted.

Still, it would be good to try to guard the integrity of the elections. Mischief is entirely too possible.

/Edit. I shouldn't have said 'nothing'. There was a very little bit. Many of the new user accounts who voted had no posts and similar styles of personal information. Nothing definite.

Well, i know its not the best example of an election this month, but this is my thought process

1: if we dont advertise on the news page, only C3DG people will notice the elections. they know the candidates, and have the most reason to be voting, as the votes directly influence them

2: if we DID advertise, the only people we would get extra to vote would be people who really truly dont know the candidates, and probably wont be active in the game anyways, so would put in a vote and then leave for too long. not the kind of votes we need

MrWhereItsAt · August 13, 2002, 03:29

Of course, very few elections this time around would be altered very much by people not knowing the candidates.... Although it WOULD be interesting if the Banana was hailed as third President via popular vote.

Nice idea, Ninot. A thread advertising the need for less advertising is just too classic an opportunity to miss.

Sirotnikov · August 13, 2002, 05:25

I think that elections are made too often.

People don't get a chance to do anything.

Elections once in 6 or 8 weeks is what we need.

MrWhereItsAt · August 13, 2002, 05:50

By all means Siro, if you want to stay in Government for 6-8 weeks, then run next time. If such an amendment to terms is made, I for one won't be running for anything again. That's just a little too long.

Sirotnikov · August 13, 2002, 06:01

But face it - you hardly ever play.

1 week each month is spent on elections and everything
1 week is spent on getting new players accostumed to their jobs
then 2 weeks of playing.

and then elections again...

it's like making elections once per year instead of once per 4 years.

plus there's no chance for things to happen - like govts to collapse or fun things liket hat

MrWhereItsAt · August 13, 2002, 06:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
But face it - you hardly ever play.

True... and it's unlikely I'd be missed if I disappeared once my term is up.

However, I doubt I am the only one who has a problem with longer terms, especially with the North's summer holidays ending. Four weeks is OK to commit to, but 6 weeks or 8 may be completely out of the question for very many. We seem to be having problems now with candidacy for positions whilst terms are 4 weeks. In how bad a shape will we be if we extend the sentences?

Ask how many of the current and previous Ministers would have run knowing they needed to stay for an extra few weeks. It may just be my feeling, but I doubt very many would be too enamoured with the idea.

disorganizer · August 13, 2002, 06:57

dont you do turn-chats during elections and in the 1st week after?

Spiffor · August 13, 2002, 07:43

The game never stops : we'll have a turnchat (a turnthread actually) wednesday, completely dring the elections.

Plus, I'd like to tell Siro an official not only works during turnchats, but works inbetween as well. Just imagine the ton of work that awaits Unorthodox, who wants to "organize" us

(for the record, even if I have a minor ministry, I spend most of my spare time in the Demogame)

UnOrthOdOx · August 13, 2002, 08:01

Ninot, I do the news update and it is submitted each Saturday. The elections will be over by then. Don't worry about it too bad.

disorganizer · August 13, 2002, 09:55

spiffor: so there will be 4 weeks to play instead of 2...

Jon Shafer · August 13, 2002, 12:02

Siro, we have a hard enough time to fill up ~10 spots in the government with 200+ citizens (active ones? Who knows). Making term lengths longer would simply decrease the diminishing numbers of potential officials even more. Would it be nice if things were changed? Of course, but like Mwia, even during the summer I doubt I could have absolutely commited myself to 6 or 8 weeks at a time.