How to do elections: Discussion here

PinkyGen · December 26, 2003, 02:28

In game turns, aka not real life, our struggle for independence began in November. April will mark the 6 month point, and new elections will be held. The new government would presumbably take over for the May turn. I want these to be clean and fair, no foul play. They must also be simple, with no need for recounts.

Thus here is what I propose the rule is.
1. Voting is done in election thread.
2. Instead of voting in a poll, the voter must post in public who they are voting for. This avoids screwy things happening with the polls.
3. Elections are completed in a weeks time from the first posting of the election thread.

I know this means that our votes are public, but most of the people here know our views anyway. I would have prefered to keep votes private, but I do not want a re-hap like what happened last election.

Other than that, the system seems simple. We keep the same arithmatic rules as in the basic laws thread, and the Government is formed out of whomever can get or negotiate a majority in the knesset.

I intend to post the election thread after the March turn is done. This will give one game month turn for voting, the possible forming of a new government, and the appointment of people to new posts.

Comments, suggestions? Hannukah gelt for your beloved PM?

*cues the music* For if I am re-elected, a Sherman in every driveway and Hannukah gelt for every pot. Vote One Israel!!

yaroslav · December 26, 2003, 05:30

The system is simple and looks great. However, if we want private vote I suggest this system:

Everyone that want to vote send a email to the ELECTION REFREE (I volunteer to do that) and to (using the CC field) the inspectors (One for each party). The votes are counted by the REFREE and the inspector can supervise the count.

Nilat · December 27, 2003, 02:26

In this election, every minister position is re-elected?

POTUS · December 27, 2003, 03:32

No, just the parties are chosen, then a coalition is formed to choose the ministers.

Nilat · December 27, 2003, 05:15

ok

Ben Kenobi · December 27, 2003, 08:53

I understand the concerns that prompt people to post whom they voted for, but I feel that this violates one of the primary rights in a free democracy. People should not have to confess whom they voted for, if they do not want other people to know. If they know that they must reveal their vote, this is going to affect the person they will end up voting for, since few want to vote for the losing side.

I suggest a compromise. People who have voted, ought to post in the thread, so we know who has voted. They should not have to reveal the contents of their vote publicly.

However, I do not see a way we can enforce this restriction, so any election would have to make this voluntary. If a person wanted to, he could still vote in our election polls, regardless of whether they post or not.

EmuGod · December 27, 2003, 12:39

I say we pm the votes to an imprtial person such as Darius. This person will also be sent a list of who is eligible to vote and will count up the votes and post the results.

PinkyGen · December 27, 2003, 15:20

Basically, we desire two things that unfortunately compete with each other. We desire fair and accountable elections, but we also desire that our votes be anonymous. By assuring total anonymity, we become less certain the election is fair. During the last election, we basically had to guess how many times Panag and his DL's voted and then discount those votes.

On the other hand, by making elections accountable, votes can no longer be perfectly anonymous. It's a tradeoff. We have to decide how much anonymity we want, versus certaintity that the election was fair.

For Emugod's suggestion, I want any impartial person to agree to do it before it gets considered as an option. An I would like to point out that Darius is not impartial, he is a member of One Israel.

I'm confused on what Kenobi is promoting. Any posting that you "voted" in a thread should at the mininum be mandatory, not voluntary. Elections still haves rules that must be followed, and this violates no one's rights. When I vote in elections, my precinct must cross my name off the list to be sure I do not vote again.
Assuming posting that you "voted" is mandatory, the system still pretty much assures anonyminity. It's weakness is that we can still be unsure how the votes actually went. I think it is highly likely that we will have more votes in the poll than people posting that they voted in the thread. This raises the question of who then who voted in the poll who should not have been voting?

My own proposed system assures fairness, but no anonymity. Kenobi is probably not just the only one who wants anonymity.

I think Yaro's system is the best compromise, provided he is willing to be the referee, and the party chairmen are prepared to receive the votes. I would trust Yaro to be pretty impartial, and the party chairmen can check to make sure it is. We lose some anonymity because four players know the votes, and these are the players who would be the most interested in knowing how people voted as well. But I feel this is the best way to maximize accountability and anonymity; it's the best deal we'll get. The system pretty much assures a fair vote, and we lose only some anonymity.

yaroslav · December 27, 2003, 16:55

PinkyGen, two things:

-I'm willing to volunteer as the referee

-and please edit out the reference to Panag

[We haven't any evidence him voting twice, do you remember

]

Dr. Nick · December 27, 2003, 21:35

Quote:

We haven't any evidence him voting twice, do you remember

We had his bloody confession.

EmuGod · December 28, 2003, 01:01

The issue of panag and the possibility that he voted twice is long over. Don't mention it again please. (Remember Ming's last reaction to this)

PinkyGen · December 28, 2003, 02:02

I am not attempting to redebate past actions. The problem is that there was such uncertaintity that such debate was possible, that a certain someone may or may not have voted twice.

Anyway, the main point is I like Yaro's way.

I trust him to count, providing I get a cc of the mail as well.

With a human counting, there can be no uncertaintity.

EmuGod · December 28, 2003, 10:25

Why not use pms instead?

POTUS · December 28, 2003, 17:43

Do you know if someone has a new email account, and just forgot to change the Contact Info? With pms, we can know who sent the ballot.

POTUS · December 28, 2003, 17:51

What if we had people pm or e-mail their vote to three different people. We would only accept e-mails from accounts on the contact list, and each of those people would count up the number of ballots. Then, the three people would reconcile the vote counts.

Or, it could be four people, an election referee, and the three party leaders.

PinkyGen · December 29, 2003, 15:55

I assumed we would be using PM's, not e-mail.

POTUS · December 29, 2003, 16:09

Ok. When you said mail, I thought you meant e-mail.

EmuGod · December 29, 2003, 22:53

Why four people? Yaroslav is a member of the Centre Party but is also impartial and I know that I don't need to look at ballots if he does. If he counts the votes gives me the results, I trust that he is being honest.

Nilat · December 30, 2003, 03:33

Javier is a honest Spanish person! Pm's!

yaroslav · December 30, 2003, 09:46

The problem is not me being honest or not - I thank you for your high opinion about me, that I think I don't deserve.

The problem is that the PM system is not anynomus

EmuGod · December 30, 2003, 11:49

If anyone is going to see who voted for who and to be honest about it, then yaroslav, PinkyGen and Ben Kenobi are good people to do so. I think they can be trusted.

POTUS · December 30, 2003, 17:33

Ok, ok. I just thought four people, one for each party and an impartial person, to ensure that everything was accurate. I completely trust yaroslav, PinkyGen, and Ben Kenobi, but, what if someone forgets to count a person?

PinkyGen · December 30, 2003, 17:35

I'd prefer more than one person looking at it. I trust Yaro too, but mistakes can happen.

PinkyGen · December 30, 2003, 23:18

Ok, the election will start once the current March turn ends. An election thread will be posted with the details on how to vote.
Votes are to be PM'd to Yaroslav and the three party leaders, me, Emugod, and Ben Kenobi. A party leader can opt out of seeing the votes if he wishes, just tell me before I start elections.

Elections will last for a week from the posting of the election thread, then the rest of the time before the May turn begins will be making any changes in government and military that is necessary, depending on what the voters decide.

conmcb25 · December 31, 2003, 08:51

I still say the way to ensure a FAIR, is to post your votes in the thread.

Can anyone who really feels they need an anonymous vote post it here?

I think we need to decide whats more important, fairness? or being anonymous?

Because any system that ensures being anonymous is going to be open to cheating and mistakes. Im not saying it is going to happen just that people can always wonder about those systems.

I see everyones point about being anonymous and I wish we could do that but based on the experience of the last election, I REALLY think we need a vote in the post.

EmuGod · December 31, 2003, 10:20

PinkyGen, don't you mean to organize before the April turn and not the May one?

PinkyGen · December 31, 2003, 15:06

Quote:

Originally posted by EmuGod
PinkyGen, don't you mean to organize before the April turn and not the May one?

Isn't that what I said. Elections shall begin when the March turn ends, and shall coincide with the April turn. We shall be playing the April turn and holding elections at the same time!

Con, I know the PM system is more complicated, but unless all of us people from all three parties looking at the votes are crooked, it should be fair.

yaroslav · January 9, 2004, 17:49

I'm BUMPING this thread

because we should start the elections right now, but I'd like to have unanimity if possible between the three parties before starting them

conmcb25 · January 9, 2004, 22:51

Quote:

Originally posted by PinkyGen
Con, I know the PM system is more complicated, but unless all of us people from all three parties looking at the votes are crooked, it should be fair.

It takes more time and effort, therefore it will be a pain in the but.

Dont expect me to run the elections then, the only Im going to do that is if we all post the vote in a thread.

and what about the occassional lurker? You expect him to send a PM to three people? (Or whatever the numberis?)

This Demo game is suppossed to be a game for us not a career!

I just cant fathom why we wouldn't want a simple accountable system thats easy to reconcile when we have a hard time finding people to play the turn on a regular basis.

Keep it simple and easy, it ENCOURAGES participation.

POTUS · January 10, 2004, 00:40

Well, it isn't so hard is it? And, we are looking for a way where non-citizens, i.e. lurkers and others who just happen upon this can't vote and mess us up.