World decision making

[Flubber]

In the general democracy forum, there are a number of pollls designed to implement new rules about turnaround time and penalties for late-playing. I don't have a problem with the poll really but I wondered if we should have an issue with decisions being made on the basis of one person, one vote. The reality is that the Hive has approximately twice the members of the other factions and therefore twice the voting power.

So how do you think that decisions about rules should be made??

[Flubber]

Note that I voted one faction, one vote. I believe that we are all separate nations now and things should be determined on a factional basis.

[BulMaster]

well if they have more members the should get more votes i think like if they are a larger faction then they should get a benefit
of course this is how i would put things

[Flubber]

well vote that way if you wish . . . I just fear that a larger faction could wield disproportionate power.

[Makahlua]

ignore

[johndmuller]

Cap'n Flubber and the Cuspidore have been quite outspoken in favor of minority rights - i.e. protecting ourselves from the tyranny of the majority - in the main Democracy forum. We have our several reasons, our natures as independent minded freebooters being only one of them; another being the fact that the Hive has roughly double the members of any other faction and so would get a disproportionate say in any decisions. While this is a democracy game, we are rather 5 competing democracies (and not necessarily democracies either) than 1 big democracy. The issue at hand (treatment of tardy turn taking) is not so much the issue as are several other elements of the debate:

- Who the ^$%$# nominated them to create "Official" polls?
- Even if this is only partly a faction issue (the smaller factions are more likely to run short of people during turn time), if this decision making system is established, when the time comes for an issue with more obvious faction-interest, do we really want to give the Hive twice as many votes as anyone else? The Hive plus 1 ally has about the same power as the remaining 3 factions combined; when it is down to 4 factions, the Hive + 1 has a guaranteed majority; at 3 factions, the Hive = both of them together.
- The Chairmen of the Hive seem to be really into rules and regulations (maybe they are just role-playing the Police State, maybe they just like it that way and that's why they are leaders of the Hive) - Do we like it that way? I think not; before you know it xenorum will be taxed, or worse!

The particular threads over there are: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=88769 and http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=88807 please weigh in over there to the extent that you are not too drunk on Democracy (I knew that peacekeeper brew was dangerous). Don't worry BulMaster, you're welcome to your opinions (never mind those Black Spots that keep turning up in your mailbox).

The Cuspidore received a bottle from the Drones on the subject; much as we fear dismiss the Drones as a serious opponent, we appear to have common cause with them on this issue. One would think that the other two factions would also do the Hive arithmatic in the secrecy of the ballot box, if not out front in the debate.

Anyway, your votes and support in the Demo forum are requested.

[foolish_icarus]

1 person, 1 vote

Tyranny by majority can happen just as easily (or more so) with 1 vote per faction as on a 1 vote/person basis, but that's unlikely anyway, because Googlie can be expected to not implement anything clearly unfair.
And finally, I think yer all the best maties one could hope for, but no one's tellin this hand to vote on party (or faction) lines!

[Flubber]

Folks

while everyone has every right to vote as they wish, I would ask for your support for the one nation-one vote proposal for the following reasons

1. Roleplaying-- What nation would submit to world governance in which they do not get an equal say?

2. Roleplaying-- Pirates in particular would be anti-authority and would oppose the poll for that reason

3. Reality- game fairness-- we are talking about who gets to set the rules and it is conceivanle that the members of one faction could dominate

4. Reality-- self interest-- we get more of a say this way

One vote per person is the way things work in here, but out there, they are opponents.

[johndmuller]

"Well, as it stands now, Cap'n Flubber, we would have to %!#@&#* Abbbsstain", sputtered BrownBeaard, dunking his head in the PorkBrine barrel, slicking back his hair, and beginning to trim his namesake beard with a very huge and shiny, ornate green-handled hunting knife, holding it out at arms length from time to time to use as a mirror. He chuckles, seemingly after noticing the engraving on the blade ("... to my Dearest Previn, with all my , - Lady D).

"Have you heard from Cap'n Hercules? We really need to find the blighter - we need his vote here to to break this tie, surely he's with us - or do you think he is the mystery third vote already on our side? If it is tied, does that mean that Cap'n Hercules can break the tie - even if he's already voted before - Har, Har, Har Harrrr?"

(walking noisily down the deck toward the wheelhouse) "Those *&@#! Bees are really gonna get on our case if we have to abstain. #(*^&$ ^%$@@ *&^%$$@!", he shouts, to noone in particular. (once again to Cap'n Flubber) What about Cap'n fjdfyetr (unintelligible, drowned out by a loud "AwwKKK", from BrownBeards parrot), I thought you 'had the goods' on the %^$#ster, could blackmail'em, you said, 'Git'em to do whatever you wanted', you said, well how 'bout it, this might be as good a time as any? ... or wuz you just makin that up tryin ter impress me? eh?"

[Googlie]

If I had a vote I'd vote for "1 person - 1 vote"

All the pre-game decisions were taken by all players voting on a 1 person - 1-vote basis, with a 2/3rds majority needed to pass (with the exception of certain powers abrogated by the CMN, such as who the AI was, how to beef them up, etc), and the game has turned out OK so far

All the factions, to a greater or lesser extent, have some "sleeping" members - people who at some point applied to join but have never posted - and indeed a couple whose e-mail addies were rejected, so cannot enter the Private Forums (but anyone can vote in the general poll - don't even have to be a registered ACDG member to visit the site or to vote - just need to be a 'Poly registered member)

So the faction numbers listed as members per faction are somewhat unrepresentative - the Hive actually has about 1/4 of currently active game participants.

I think (although it was never voted on, with the requisite 2/3rds majority) that I'd have veto powers if some action were contemplated or taken detrimental to the game (such as the "demand withdrawal" feature where the AI takes over the decision making - in that case I'd rule that the turn be replayed without that feature being invoked)* (see below)

In fact, I'd apply every one of the Forum Wars rules - these were hashed out over a three week period by the best minds in each of the 3 major smac forums.

* : 1 faction - 1 vote wouldn't solve this one, as , say, the pirates and Hive were pacted and about to take on the 3 other factions, quietly massing their forces for a combined assault. A quick vote to allow the "demand withdrawal" feature would result in a loss of several years to get the troops back in position under a truce or vendetta status. I'd reserve the right to veto that vote (but would be over-ruled by the 3 - 2 faction split)

I suppose that the 2/3rds of players result could be the same, if the 3 factions combined made up 2/3rds of the players, but that's less likely in my opinion as the faction with the large # players (the Hive) would need to be the one getting attacked and wanting to invoke the withdrawal feature - and that'd be unlikely until later game given the Hive's perimeter defenses

Maybe the vote should be to give me certain veto powers not subject to change by a subsequent vote, and rely on me to keep fair play in motion

G.

[Hercules]

Sorry for late arrival maties. I am persuaded by the 1 faction one vote arguement. But within each faction 1 person 1 vote of course. But of course everything is never clear cut.

For instance for some matters the faction vote reflects growth, power and SPs etc and for other issues 1 faction 1 vote example repealing UN Charter.

The matter needs lomger discussion. That 's clear and maybe a category of issues could be open to 1 person 1 vote.

By voting 1 faction 1 vote, I feel I keep the discussion open whereas a 1 person 1 vote effectively seals the matter.

[FlameFlash]

1 per 1.