NATION

PASSWORD

Making the Secretary-General Meaningful

Bug reports, general help, ideas for improvements, and questions about how things are meant to work.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Unibot III
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7088
Founded: Mar 11, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Unibot III » Sun Feb 11, 2024 11:53 am

Simone Republic wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:As the current leaderboard holder, I fully support this notion. https://ifly6.no-ip.org/passed-resolutions/GA/authors.


Sedge: more important, is there a timeline for implementing this? Ie is this going to coincide with the expiry of Kuriko's term of office as the last SecGen (that's 1 April) or are there going to be delays? There seems to be a lot of details unsettled like how prominent the recommendation is, how detailed it is, as well as whether the SecGen can simply make no recommendations (or run on a platform of making no recommendations, as I think some people suggested).

Edit: there seems to be a lot of moving parts still.


Are they still planning on April 1 for elections?

I thought there was an agreement that doing it during April Fools buried the election and would draw attention away from it?

If there is interest in an alternative date, I would suggest the date that the GA and SC were created… this year happens to be the fifteenth anniversary of the GA/SC being created too.

June 8 was the anniversary.

Building on my earlier proposal…

SC chair elections would always begin June 1st and concluded a week later on June 8th. That way we’re using a simple, streamlined date (easy to remember) for the start of elections.

And the GA chair would be automatically acclaimed on June 8th based on who had passed the most GA resolutions in the twelve months prior (newest resolution being the tiebreaker).

This adds an exciting election mini-game (with in all honestly a GP element) to the SC. And a reward and recognition for whatever GA author went on a tear last year.
Last edited by Unibot III on Sun Feb 11, 2024 11:55 am, edited 2 times in total.
[violet] wrote:I mean this in the best possible way,
but Unibot is not a typical NS player.
Milograd wrote:You're a caring, resolute lunatic
with the best of intentions.
Org. Join Date: 25-05-2008 | Former Delegate of TRR

Factbook // Collected works // Gameplay Alignment Test //
9 GA Res., 14 SC Res. // Headlines from Unibot // WASC HQ: A Guide

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
✯ Duty is Eternal, Justice is Imminent: UDL

User avatar
The Ice States
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2367
Founded: Jun 23, 2022
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby The Ice States » Sun Feb 11, 2024 12:44 pm

Re Unibot's proposal, what happens if a player writes resolutions across multiple nations? For example, in 2023 I passed 16 GA resolutions as Magecastle Embassy Building A5, and 6 as The Ice States, adding up to a total of 22; meanwhile Simone Republic passed 18 GA resolutions in that year. If this is per-nation, it would be Simone who wins it; if it is per-player, I would win it.

Edit: Which is to say, I am increasingly in support of this measure, as it would encourage activity (players writing good resolutions so they can become SecGen) without giving bad actors more influence over the GA, instead doing the opposite.
Last edited by The Ice States on Sun Feb 11, 2024 12:55 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Factbooks · 42x World Assembly Author · Festering Snakepit Wiki · Quincentenary Archive · GA Stat Effects Data

Immigration Officer, Greater Dienstad | Fmr. Minister of World Assembly Affairs, The North Pacific | GA Secretariat
Posts in the WA forums are Ooc and unofficial, absent indication otherwise.
Please check out my roleplay thread The Battle of Glass Tears!
WA 101 Guides to GA authorship, campaigning, and more.

User avatar
Wallenburg
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 22789
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
Democratic Socialists

Postby Wallenburg » Sun Feb 11, 2024 1:07 pm

Except for the accounts system floated elsewhere, I don't think there's a good way to account for puppets being the same person. That said, while the prodigious author idea doesn't fix any of the fundamental issues with Sedge's project, it would (1) actually encourage continuous WA activity instead of a semi-annual popularity contest and (2) control for bad faith actors seeking to ruin the game for everyone else.
Last edited by Wallenburg on Sun Feb 11, 2024 1:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
While she had no regrets about throwing the lever to douse her husband's mistress in molten gold, Blanche did feel a pang of conscience for the innocent bystanders whose proximity had caused them to suffer gilt by association.

King of Snark, General Assembly Secretary, Old Man from The East Pacific

User avatar
The Ice States
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2367
Founded: Jun 23, 2022
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby The Ice States » Sun Feb 11, 2024 1:27 pm

To Unibot, what do you think about also having some secret formula that takes into account metrics such as resolution popularity at vote, number and success of repeals submitted, defeated resolutions, resolution length, etc. so as to estimate the "best" author that year? Would this also improve meaningful engagement, as people have to strive for more than just quantity?
Factbooks · 42x World Assembly Author · Festering Snakepit Wiki · Quincentenary Archive · GA Stat Effects Data

Immigration Officer, Greater Dienstad | Fmr. Minister of World Assembly Affairs, The North Pacific | GA Secretariat
Posts in the WA forums are Ooc and unofficial, absent indication otherwise.
Please check out my roleplay thread The Battle of Glass Tears!
WA 101 Guides to GA authorship, campaigning, and more.

User avatar
Unibot III
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7088
Founded: Mar 11, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Unibot III » Sun Feb 11, 2024 3:06 pm

The Ice States wrote:To Unibot, what do you think about also having some secret formula that takes into account metrics such as resolution popularity at vote, number and success of repeals submitted, defeated resolutions, resolution length, etc. so as to estimate the "best" author that year? Would this also improve meaningful engagement, as people have to strive for more than just quantity?


Hiya!

RE: Multiple accounts

I’m sympathetic as I did it myself when I was a WA Author (Stash Kroh / Unibotian WA Mission) but there’s no existing way to track which author is which, and there’s really no need for one.

Players that want to be in the running for the GA Chair role will naturally do their work under one account and those that don’t care, won’t necessarily. :p

There may even be veteran players in the future who deliberately maintain multiple accounts so they can effectively opt out of consideration for GA Chair.

(EDIT: you’ll have to pass a few more resolutions to catch up!)

RE: Metrics

I’m inclined to say simpler the better for the system, because then it’s relatively easy to introduce to newcomers.

I don’t think many metrics are a consistent or accurate test of resolution quality (e.g., length is meaningless; lots of really well-written resolutions are controversial).

If you’re passing enough resolutions to be in the running for GA Chair during that election cycle, you must be doing something right to be gaining that much support on a consistent basis. The competitors for the chairship will undoubtedly be a GA regular of some kind.

The only really consistent metric is whether your resolution is repealed shortly after its passed because resolutions that are insta-repealed usually have serious flaws. But then again it would be very unusual (unheard of?) for an author to pass so many trashy, insta-repealed resolutions as to be a serious contender for most productive author of the year — usually those are one-off blips.

——

It might be helpful for someone to go back and look at it who’d be the chair in 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020 etc. to get a sense of how fluid it’d be, especially for non-GAers who may view the community as static/exclusive, rather than a living, evolving institution.

I think it’s an exciting idea, myself, because I think to a newbie it’d look straightforward (“Oh, the GA and the SC both have chairs and they make recommendations”) but beneath the surface, there’d be another dimension to the bicameralism. For SC regulars, May and June would be a time of serious political speculation over who was running and which regions would endorse them — a change of chair could bring a geopolitical shift. For GA regulars, the chair would mark a fun payoff and an extra responsibility for a hard-working author.
Last edited by Unibot III on Sun Feb 11, 2024 3:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.
[violet] wrote:I mean this in the best possible way,
but Unibot is not a typical NS player.
Milograd wrote:You're a caring, resolute lunatic
with the best of intentions.
Org. Join Date: 25-05-2008 | Former Delegate of TRR

Factbook // Collected works // Gameplay Alignment Test //
9 GA Res., 14 SC Res. // Headlines from Unibot // WASC HQ: A Guide

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
✯ Duty is Eternal, Justice is Imminent: UDL

User avatar
The Ice States
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2367
Founded: Jun 23, 2022
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby The Ice States » Sun Feb 11, 2024 3:20 pm

Will pull out the lies, damned lies, and statistics shortly. I will be assuming a system where GA Chair "elections" happen every April 1st from 2016, and select the most prolific author nation since the last April 1st.
Last edited by The Ice States on Sun Feb 11, 2024 3:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Factbooks · 42x World Assembly Author · Festering Snakepit Wiki · Quincentenary Archive · GA Stat Effects Data

Immigration Officer, Greater Dienstad | Fmr. Minister of World Assembly Affairs, The North Pacific | GA Secretariat
Posts in the WA forums are Ooc and unofficial, absent indication otherwise.
Please check out my roleplay thread The Battle of Glass Tears!
WA 101 Guides to GA authorship, campaigning, and more.

User avatar
The Ice States
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2367
Founded: Jun 23, 2022
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby The Ice States » Sun Feb 11, 2024 8:29 pm

Here it is!

Assuming a regular system of nation-based most prolific author from April 1 of that year to April 1 of the previous, not counting co-authors, and counting 2024 as April 1 2023 - present, we get the following GA Secgens,

2016 - Imperium Anglorum / Separatist Peoples
2017 - Imperium Anglorum
2018 - Imperium Anglorum
2019 - Imperium Anglorum
2020 - Imperium Anglorum / Marxist Germany
2021 - Cretox State
2022 - Minskiev / Tinhampton
2023 - Magecastle Embassy Building A5
2024 - Simone Republic

This supports the idea that historically there would have been some monopolisation, with one winner from 2016 - 2019, although since 2020 this does not appear to be much of an issue.
-----
Counting co-authorships breaks the 2017 tie in favour of Sep, 2020 one in favour of IA, and 2022 one in favour of Tin, with a tie instead created in 2023.

2016 - Separatist Peoples
2017 - Imperium Anglorum
2018 - Imperium Anglorum
2019 - Imperium Anglorum
2020 - Imperium Anglorum / Marxist Germany
2021 - Cretox State
2022 - Tinhampton
2023 - Magecastle Embassy Building A5 / Simone Republic
2024 - Simone Republic
-----
If we exempt repeals, not counting co-authorships, we get the same as above except with the 2023 tie broken in favour of Simone and Minskiev instead of Tin winning 2022,

2016 - Separatist Peoples
2017 - Imperium Anglorum
2018 - Imperium Anglorum
2019 - Separatist Peoples
2020 - Imperium Anglorum / Marxist Germany
2021 - Cretox State
2022 - Minskiev
2023 - Simone Republic
2024 - Simone Republic
-----
Counting co-authorships but not repeals, we seem to get similar results as above except with a tie in 2019, Kenmoria in the 2020 tie, and Tin as 2022's winner.

2016 - Separatist Peoples
2017 - Imperium Anglorum
2018 - Imperium Anglorum
2019 - Imperium Anglorum / Separatist Peoples
2020 - Imperium Anglorum / Kenmoria / Marxist Germany
2021 - Cretox State
2022 - Tinhampton
2023 - Simone Republic
2024 - Simone Republic
-----
Counting co-authorships but not repeals or repealed resolutions (as of the relevant April 1st) introduces Hulldom as 2022 victor, while creating two-way ties for 2020 and 2023.

2016 - Separatist Peoples
2017 - Imperium Anglorum
2018 - Imperium Anglorum
2019 - Separatist Peoples
2020 - Imperium Anglorum / Kenmoria
2021 - Cretox State
2022 - Hulldom
2023 - Magecastle Embassy Building A5 / Simone Republic
2024 - Simone Republic
-----
Excluding both co-authorships and repealed resolutions,

2016 - Separatist Peoples
2017 - Imperium Anglorum
2018 - Imperium Anglorum
2019 - Imperium Anglorum / Separatist Peoples
2020 - Imperium Anglorum
2021 - Cretox State / Imperium Anglorum
2022 - Tinhampton
2023 - Magecastle Embassy Building A5
2024 - Simone Republic


Based on these facts, I would support any of these systems except the third and sixth ones, as the former seems to make the sample size too small and the latter seems too prone to monopolisation. My support is conditional on there being a tie-breaking mechanism; does the proposer have any suggestions? Perhaps something along the lines of "against (or for?) previous/incumbent Secgens -> most active (positive & unrepealed) resolutions -> most primary authorships -> most recent primary authorship"?

For reference, my preferred system so far is "co-authors but not repeals or repealed resolutions", along with the above tiebreaking mechanism.
Last edited by The Ice States on Sun Feb 11, 2024 8:46 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Factbooks · 42x World Assembly Author · Festering Snakepit Wiki · Quincentenary Archive · GA Stat Effects Data

Immigration Officer, Greater Dienstad | Fmr. Minister of World Assembly Affairs, The North Pacific | GA Secretariat
Posts in the WA forums are Ooc and unofficial, absent indication otherwise.
Please check out my roleplay thread The Battle of Glass Tears!
WA 101 Guides to GA authorship, campaigning, and more.

User avatar
Wallenburg
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 22789
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
Democratic Socialists

Postby Wallenburg » Sun Feb 11, 2024 9:01 pm

It's worth noting that biannual selection would result in a greater likelihood for variation.
While she had no regrets about throwing the lever to douse her husband's mistress in molten gold, Blanche did feel a pang of conscience for the innocent bystanders whose proximity had caused them to suffer gilt by association.

King of Snark, General Assembly Secretary, Old Man from The East Pacific

User avatar
Unibot III
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7088
Founded: Mar 11, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Unibot III » Mon Feb 12, 2024 4:41 am

Thanks for pouring over that data, Ice States. I hope the back-casting is helpful, especially non-GAers, to get a realistic sense of what we could expect from a GA Chair.

My suggestion for the tie-breaker was whoever among the tied competitors’ passed the most recent resolution at the time of the acclamation.

(I’m not concerned about IA’s dominance from 2016-2019, personally. It’s a huge streak and not one that could have been sustained indefinitely.)
[violet] wrote:I mean this in the best possible way,
but Unibot is not a typical NS player.
Milograd wrote:You're a caring, resolute lunatic
with the best of intentions.
Org. Join Date: 25-05-2008 | Former Delegate of TRR

Factbook // Collected works // Gameplay Alignment Test //
9 GA Res., 14 SC Res. // Headlines from Unibot // WASC HQ: A Guide

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
✯ Duty is Eternal, Justice is Imminent: UDL

User avatar
Gruenberg
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1333
Founded: Jul 18, 2005
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Gruenberg » Mon Feb 12, 2024 5:29 am

People who ignore the WA's IC character should be made DOS, not SG.
"Do you mean "coming out"...as a Guardian reader would understand the term?"

User avatar
Sedgistan
Site Director
 
Posts: 35232
Founded: Oct 20, 2006
Anarchy

Postby Sedgistan » Mon Feb 12, 2024 6:04 am

Gruenberg wrote:People who ignore the WA's IC character should be made DOS, not SG.

Countertrollpoint: instead of making people DOS, we should restrict their posting solely to the Strangers' Bar.

On a more serious note, I don't view Unibot's concept of consolidating further power into someone who is already effectively the most influential player within the GA as being beneficial.

I understand the desire that if this role is going to exist and apply to the GA (which it will on both counts) that the Sec-Gen have some experience within that chamber. I feel a better tree to bark up would be to suggest that GA authorship either provides more prominence/a leg up in the election stage, or is even a requirement for eligibility to run. I'm very wary of the latter, because it requiring GA + SC authorship is a requirement to run, then the pool of eligible candidates may shrink too far, but it would be a driver of participation, and ensure that whoever is elected has an interest in both halves.

Regarding timing, there is no chance of this being implemented in time for April 1st.

User avatar
Haganham
Minister
 
Posts: 2936
Founded: Aug 17, 2021
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Haganham » Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:25 am

I can't see authorship being a serious obstacle to anyone with a real chance of winning. If you can muster the regional support to be elected SG you can absolutely get a resolution passed.
That itself is a problem with that solution, as it means it's not a useful measure of GA experience.
Last edited by Haganham on Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
Imagine reading a signature, but over the course of it the quality seems to deteriorate and it gets wose an wose, where the swenetence stwucture and gwammer rewerts to a pwoint of uttew non swence, an u jus dont wanna wead it anymwore (o´ω`o) awd twa wol owdewl iws jus awfwul (´・ω・`);. bwt tw sinawtur iwswnwt obwer nyet, it gwos own an own an own an own. uwu wanyaa stwop weadwing bwut uwu cwant stop wewding, uwu stwartd thwis awnd ur gwoing two fwinibsh it nowo mwattew wat! uwu hab mwoxie kwiddowo, bwut uwu wibl gwib ub sowon. i cwan wite wike dis fwor owors, swo dwont cwalengbe mii..

… wbats dis??? uwu awe stwill weedinb mwie sinatwr?? uwu habe awot ob detewemwinyanyatiom!! 。◕‿◕。! u habve comopweedid tha signwtr, good job!

User avatar
The Ice States
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2367
Founded: Jun 23, 2022
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby The Ice States » Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:57 am

Sedgistan wrote:I understand the desire that if this role is going to exist and apply to the GA (which it will on both counts) that the Sec-Gen have some experience within that chamber. I feel a better tree to bark up would be to suggest that GA authorship either provides more prominence/a leg up in the election stage, or is even a requirement for eligibility to run. I'm very wary of the latter, because it requiring GA + SC authorship is a requirement to run, then the pool of eligible candidates may shrink too far, but it would be a driver of participation, and ensure that whoever is elected has an interest in both halves.

Is it at all possible to have separate Chairs for each chamber, and then limit the race to, say, authors of positive (non-repeal) resolutions in that chamber since the last election, or perhaps the ten or so most prolific authors in that chamber since then? If so, this would address the bulk of my objections to this change. The majority of bad actors I am concerned about would be ineligible.
Last edited by The Ice States on Mon Feb 12, 2024 12:00 pm, edited 9 times in total.
Factbooks · 42x World Assembly Author · Festering Snakepit Wiki · Quincentenary Archive · GA Stat Effects Data

Immigration Officer, Greater Dienstad | Fmr. Minister of World Assembly Affairs, The North Pacific | GA Secretariat
Posts in the WA forums are Ooc and unofficial, absent indication otherwise.
Please check out my roleplay thread The Battle of Glass Tears!
WA 101 Guides to GA authorship, campaigning, and more.

User avatar
Wallenburg
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 22789
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
Democratic Socialists

Postby Wallenburg » Mon Feb 12, 2024 11:46 am

Sedgistan wrote:On a more serious note, I don't view Unibot's concept of consolidating further power into someone who is already effectively the most influential player within the GA as being beneficial.

Yet you're more than happy to consolidate further power into someone who is already at least among the most influential in GP. Aren't you claiming that you're doing this "for our own good"?
Last edited by Wallenburg on Mon Feb 12, 2024 11:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
While she had no regrets about throwing the lever to douse her husband's mistress in molten gold, Blanche did feel a pang of conscience for the innocent bystanders whose proximity had caused them to suffer gilt by association.

King of Snark, General Assembly Secretary, Old Man from The East Pacific

User avatar
A Bloodred Moon
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 418
Founded: Jan 13, 2019
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby A Bloodred Moon » Mon Feb 12, 2024 11:58 am

The Ice States wrote:Is it at all possible to have separate Chairs for each chamber

I’m not sure what purpose this would serve other than having to run the event twice or running a double election. Both seem like an unnecessary hassle, as you’d double the campaign TGs and might risk exhausting interest.

and then limit the race to, say, the ten most prolific authors in the relevant chamber since the last election? If so, this would address the bulk of my objections to this change. The majority of bad actors I am concerned about would be ineligible.

All this serves to do is remove the heart of any democratic element from the race, since you’d essentially lock even running to an arbitrarily small circle of elitists. If the Sec-Gen is meant to be a voice for the average voter, then I’m not certain what the point of excluding the average voter from even running is.
JoWhatup

Alpha Emeritus of Lone Wolves United - For Your Protection

User avatar
The Ice States
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2367
Founded: Jun 23, 2022
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby The Ice States » Mon Feb 12, 2024 12:02 pm

A Bloodred Moon wrote:
The Ice States wrote:Is it at all possible to have separate Chairs for each chamber

I’m not sure what purpose this would serve other than having to run the event twice or running a double election. Both seem like an unnecessary hassle, as you’d double the campaign TGs and might risk exhausting interest.

To avoid people with little interest in a chamber to have power over it.

and then limit the race to, say, the ten most prolific authors in the relevant chamber since the last election? If so, this would address the bulk of my objections to this change. The majority of bad actors I am concerned about would be ineligible.

All this serves to do is remove the heart of any democratic element from the race, since you’d essentially lock even running to an arbitrarily small circle of elitists.

"Ten most prolific authors" is insanely broad. The bar in the March - October period last year, as well as the October - March period of 2022, would be one resolution subject to a tie-breaker. (I haven't finished going through any earlier period). There's nothing "elitist" about requiring an iota of participation in the chamber which one wants to lead.

If the Sec-Gen is meant to be a voice for the average voter,

We all know that it won't be this in any scenario.
Last edited by The Ice States on Mon Feb 12, 2024 12:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Factbooks · 42x World Assembly Author · Festering Snakepit Wiki · Quincentenary Archive · GA Stat Effects Data

Immigration Officer, Greater Dienstad | Fmr. Minister of World Assembly Affairs, The North Pacific | GA Secretariat
Posts in the WA forums are Ooc and unofficial, absent indication otherwise.
Please check out my roleplay thread The Battle of Glass Tears!
WA 101 Guides to GA authorship, campaigning, and more.

User avatar
A Bloodred Moon
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 418
Founded: Jan 13, 2019
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby A Bloodred Moon » Mon Feb 12, 2024 12:19 pm

The Ice States wrote:To avoid people with little interest in a chamber to have power over it.

If they have no interest in the chamber they’re already a lot less likely to run, not to mention this seems like a standard voters should consider.

"Ten most prolific authors" is insanely broad.

It’s arbitrarily limiting the pool of candidates to 10, all of which are supposed to have pre-existing, flourishing careers. You’re raising the bar of entry for no apparent reason, which only serves to keep the Secretary-General as part of the establishment, and establishment candidates already have advantages that newcomers do not. There is no need to limit the WA’s highest seat to a pseudo-aristocracy. One of NS’ charms has always been its dynamic nature to me, that a newcomer can hop in and make it as far as their skills get them. That level of flexibility has declined in recent years, in my view - while that is perhaps the inevitable nature of all games, I’m baffled as to why the game mechanics should be adjusted to hinder it.

The bar in the March - October period last year, as well as the October - March period of 2022, would be one resolution subject to a tie-breaker.

All this really highlights is that the pool of regular authors is abyssmally small and highly concentrated.

We all know that it won't be this in any scenario.

I’m neither so pessimistic nor do I think this really an argument for or against anything.
JoWhatup

Alpha Emeritus of Lone Wolves United - For Your Protection

User avatar
The Ice States
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2367
Founded: Jun 23, 2022
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby The Ice States » Mon Feb 12, 2024 12:23 pm

I'm not sure what you're arguing, frankly. People might still (read: will) run for a joint GA-SC Sechen chamber if they're interested in one chamber but not the other. The disincentive of a candidate not running because they don't care about a chamber is not particularly applicable unless the GA and SC Secgen positions are separate.
Last edited by The Ice States on Mon Feb 12, 2024 12:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Factbooks · 42x World Assembly Author · Festering Snakepit Wiki · Quincentenary Archive · GA Stat Effects Data

Immigration Officer, Greater Dienstad | Fmr. Minister of World Assembly Affairs, The North Pacific | GA Secretariat
Posts in the WA forums are Ooc and unofficial, absent indication otherwise.
Please check out my roleplay thread The Battle of Glass Tears!
WA 101 Guides to GA authorship, campaigning, and more.

User avatar
A Bloodred Moon
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 418
Founded: Jan 13, 2019
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby A Bloodred Moon » Mon Feb 12, 2024 12:37 pm

The Ice States wrote:I'm not sure what you're arguing, frankly.

“Don’t raise the bar for entry for the World Assembly’s highest political office on a whim, killing off the elections’ dynamic nature and providing less space than ever for newcomers” would be a fairly simple summary.

People might still run for a joint GA-SC Sechen chamber if they're interested in one chamber but not the other. The disincentive of a candidate not running because they don't care about a chamber is not particularly applicable unless the GA and SC Secgen positions are separate.

It’s possible, but not overly likely that someone would run without the slightest opinion on half of their potential authority, not to mention it’s just a terrible campaign - and even if you do get elected on a platform of only one of the two chambers, at worst you’ll end up letting the votes run their course, or maybe you’ll barter with established powers, or hear out lobby groups. That’s rather the beauty of leaving the mechanics in the hands of the playerbase, there’s a large number of possibilities on how any such process would play out.

I’ll grant it’s not a perfect guarantee someone will care about both of the chambers, but that’s always a risk with mechanics, especially ones revolving around democracy. And on the flip side, I don’t think it outweighs the burnout and voter exhaustion the event would experience pretty quickly if double the telegrams went flying every six months - this was already a problem with the initial April’s Fools events, and separating the two chambers is sure to exacerbate the problem.
JoWhatup

Alpha Emeritus of Lone Wolves United - For Your Protection

User avatar
The Ice States
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2367
Founded: Jun 23, 2022
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby The Ice States » Mon Feb 12, 2024 12:43 pm

People might still run for a joint GA-SC Sechen chamber if they're interested in one chamber but not the other. The disincentive of a candidate not running because they don't care about a chamber is not particularly applicable unless the GA and SC Secgen positions are separate.

It’s possible, but not overly likely that someone would run without the slightest opinion on half of their potential authority, not to mention it’s just a terrible campaign - and even if you do get elected on a platform of only one of the two chambers, at worst you’ll end up letting the votes run their course, or maybe you’ll barter with established powers, or hear out lobby groups. That’s rather the beauty of leaving the mechanics in the hands of the playerbase, there’s a large number of possibilities on how any such process would play out.

The mechanic, as currently devised, does not do this. If enough large Gameplay regions support a candidate who only cares about the SC -- which, as argued earlier in this thread, is rather likely to happen -- they are likely to win, regardless of the actual merits of their campaign.

I’ll grant it’s not a perfect guarantee someone will care about both of the chambers, but that’s always a risk with mechanics, especially ones revolving around democracy.

It doesn't revolve around democracy.

And on the flip side, I don’t think it outweighs the burnout and voter exhaustion the event would experience pretty quickly if double the telegrams went flying every six months - this was already a problem with the initial April’s Fools events, and separating the two chambers is sure to exacerbate the problem.

If someone doesn't like the telegrams they can opt out of them. I admit that it would be preferable to have less telegrams sent about, but it's not enough to justify the very likely and significant harm to an entire chamber of the WA.
Factbooks · 42x World Assembly Author · Festering Snakepit Wiki · Quincentenary Archive · GA Stat Effects Data

Immigration Officer, Greater Dienstad | Fmr. Minister of World Assembly Affairs, The North Pacific | GA Secretariat
Posts in the WA forums are Ooc and unofficial, absent indication otherwise.
Please check out my roleplay thread The Battle of Glass Tears!
WA 101 Guides to GA authorship, campaigning, and more.

User avatar
A Bloodred Moon
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 418
Founded: Jan 13, 2019
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby A Bloodred Moon » Mon Feb 12, 2024 1:00 pm

The Ice States wrote:The mechanic, as currently devised, does not do this. If enough large Gameplay regions support a candidate who only cares about the SC -- which, as argued earlier in this thread, is rather likely to happen --

Please do point me to an argument that doesn’t boil down to “because I say so”. TNP, TWP, TEP, TSP, XKI, TCB, Europe, and the League all care about both chambers to various extents. Whether or not they prioritise the SC is kind of moot, since A) they hate each others’ guts for the most part, and thus your hypothetical about “Gameplay” regions all backing one candidate just highlights how little sense the hypothetical makes, and B) they can most definitely find an acceptable candidate that cares enough about both chambers to draw votes from people that only care about one or the other. Votes they will need, as pointed out with A).

they are likely to win, regardless of the actual merits of their campaign.

This strikes me as a bit of an assumption. No denying political backing will matter, that’s rather unavoidable in a Political Simulator, but they are no free pass.

It doesn't revolve around democracy.

You should probably re-read the proposal.

If someone doesn't like the telegrams they can opt out of them.

“We should actively disregard the fact we’re decreasing participation”.

I admit that it would be preferable to have less telegrams sent about, but it's not enough to justify the very likely and significant harm to an entire chamber of the WA.

Whatever that means.
JoWhatup

Alpha Emeritus of Lone Wolves United - For Your Protection

User avatar
Gruenberg
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1333
Founded: Jul 18, 2005
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Gruenberg » Mon Feb 12, 2024 1:11 pm

Sedgistan wrote:I understand the desire that if this role is going to exist and apply to the GA (which it will on both counts)

Image

No arguments or game mechanics have changed since the last time this was discussed and you decided that it would not apply to the WA.
"Do you mean "coming out"...as a Guardian reader would understand the term?"

User avatar
The Ice States
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2367
Founded: Jun 23, 2022
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby The Ice States » Mon Feb 12, 2024 1:17 pm

I did not say that all Gameplay regions would support one candidate, I agree that that would never happen. I said that if "enough" support a candidate, that could lead to their victory. In practice, without any control on who can run based on their participation in a chamber, I can't see any outcome other than representatives of Gameplay blocs being the primary competitors in the election.
----
For reference, these are all GA authors or co-authors between one election and the other.

Candidates for each year are ordered alphabetically.

April 2024
10+ authorships
1. Simone Republic
2. The Ice States

2 authorships
3. Tinhampton

1 authorship
4. Mark (New)
5. Markanite (=Mark) (New)
6. Mechanocracy (New)
7. The Steam-Gardens (New)
8. Varanius (New)

(NB: Under Accounts, Markanite/Mark would fall under "2 authorships").

October 2023
10+ authorships
1. Magecastle Embassy Building A5
2. Simone Republic
3. Tinhampton

2 authorships
4. Barfleur
5. Greater Cesnica
6. Imperium Anglorum
7. Merni
8. Millenhaal (New)

1 authorship
9. Chipoli
10. Cretox State
11. CSB PM Union (New)
12. Dixionconderoga (New)
13. East Chimore (New)
14. Gemeinschaftsland
15. Kenmoria
16. Namwenia (New)
17. New Kowloon Bay (New)
18. Ostrovskiy (New)
19. Refuge Isle
20. Separatist Peoples
21. Wallenburg
22. Witchcraft and Sorcery (New)

April 2023
6 authorships
1. Magecastle Embassy Building A5
2. Simone Republic (New)

4 authorships
3. Imperium Anglorum

3 authorships
4. Heidgaudr (New)

2 authorships
5. Excidium Planetis
6. Jedinsto

1 authorship
7. Attempted Socialism
8. Chipoli (New)
9. Cretox State
10. Dokansia (New)
11. Gemeinschaftsland (New)
12. Greater Cesnica
13. Heavens Reach (New)
14. Hulldom
15. Lord Dominator
16. Minskiev
17. Saint Tomas and the Northern Ice Islands
18. The Ice States (=Magecastle Embassy Building A5)
19. Tinhampton
20. Wymondham

October 2022
3 authorships
1. Hulldom
2. Thousand Branches

2 authorships
3. Greater Cesnica
4. Imperium Anglorum
5. The Wallenburgian World Assembly Offices

(NB: Under Accounts, The Forest of Aeneas/Magecastle Embassy Building A5 would fall under "2 authorships").

1 authorship
6. Alistia (New)
7. Attempted Socialism (New)
8. Bears Armed Mission
9. Daarwyrth
10. Magecastle Embassy Building A5
11. Morover
12. Novella Islands (New)
13. Princess Rainbow Sparkles
14. Saint Tomas and the Northern Ice Islands
15. Simone Republic
16. The Civitas Islands (New)
17. The Forest of Aeneas (=Magecastle Embassy Building A5)
18. Tinhampton
19. West Barack and East Obama (New)

April 2022
6 authorships
1. Minskiev

5 authorships
2. Tinhampton

4 authorships
3. Hulldom
4. Imperium Anglorum

(NB: Apatosaurus/Apatosaurus II would fall under this category if Accounts were implemented.)

3 authorships
5. Apatosaurus II (New)

2 authorships
6. Fhaengshia (New)
7. Morover
8. Xernon (New)

1 authorship
9. Apatosaurus (=Apatosaurus II) (New)
10. Barfleur
11. Evinea (New)
12. Greater Cesnica
13. Maowi
14. Sanctaria
15. Thousand Branches (New)
16. Wallenburg
17. Xanthorrhoea (New)

October 2021
5 authorships
1. Morover

4 authorships
2. Daarwyrth (New)
3. Greater Cesnica
4. Tinhampton

3 authorships
5. Jedinsto (New)

2 authorships
6. Hulldom
7. Wallenburg

(NB: Under Accounts, Hulldom would fall under "3 authorships").

1 authorship
8. Araraukar
9. Bears Armed Mission
10. Big Boyz (New)
11. Boston Castle (=Hulldom)
12. Crowheim
13. Imperium Anglorum
14. Minskiev (New)
15. Refuge Isle
16. Saint Tomas and the Northern Ice Islands
17. Scalizagasti (New)
18. South St Maarten (New)
19. The Wary Walrus

April 2021
6 authorships
1. Cretox State
2. Imperium Anglorum

5 authorships
3. Honeydewistania

4 authorships
4. Greater Cesnica (New)

2 authorships
5. Boston Castle (New)
6. Junitaki-cho (New)
7. Maowi
8. Separatist Peoples
9. Sylh Alanor (New)
10. Tinhampton
11. Wymondham (New)

1 authorship
12. Barfleur (New)
13. Crowheim (New)
14. Free Las Pinas (New)
15. Gorundu
16. Merni (New)
17. Qvait (New)
18. Regnum Italiae (New)
19. Verdant Haven (New)

October 2020
6 authorships
1. Cretox State

5 authorships
2. Imperium Anglorum
3. Morover

4 authorships
4. Honeydewistania (New)

3 authorships
5. Maowi

2 authorships
6. Kenmoria

1 authorship
7. Alba and Cymru (New)
8. Castle Federation (New)
9. Foril (New)
10. Marxist Germany
11. Pope Saint Peter the Apostle (New)
12. Refuge Isle
13. Sierra Lyricalia
14. The Greater Soviet North America (New)
15. Tinfect
16. Tinhampton

April 2020
3 authorships
1. Imperium Anglorum

2 authorships
2. Araraukar
3. Concrete Slab (New)
4. Kenmoria
5. Maowi
6. Marxist Germany (New)

1 authorship
7. Gorundu
8. Greifenburg (New)
9. Kelssek
10. Sylvai (New)
11. Terttia (New)
12. Tinhampton (New)
13. United States of Americanas (New)


Based on these facts, a requirement of at least two authorships over the period should be sufficient to ensure that candidates are the best without creating a barrier two high for newcomers. On average this would lead to seven eligible candidates (11 max, 5 min), of whom two, or an average of 26%, would never have passed a resolution prior to that period.

I would not be necessarily opposed to lowering the requirement to one authorship, as this would maximise accessibility while also seeming more intuitive than a two-resolution line. That said, I think many of the periods seem to include bad actors it would be a poor idea to include. I believe the best way to separate genuine newcomers from external actors would be to instead require one positive (ie non-repeal) resolution in that time frame. A genuine newcomer interested in contributing in good faith would likely prefer to help build the corpus juris, while an experienced player with little interest in the GA may simply want to get rid of something, or not be interested in the effort to actually create new, high-quality law. This is a real trend; without naming names, all of the said external actors would be eliminated by such a standard, while very few genuine newcomers (I can only think of two over the entire eight periods) would also be eliminated.

I emphasise that I prefer the status quo over a SecGen with GA powers; but if we have to get one, I prefer this system over the original idea.
Last edited by The Ice States on Mon Feb 12, 2024 2:15 pm, edited 8 times in total.
Factbooks · 42x World Assembly Author · Festering Snakepit Wiki · Quincentenary Archive · GA Stat Effects Data

Immigration Officer, Greater Dienstad | Fmr. Minister of World Assembly Affairs, The North Pacific | GA Secretariat
Posts in the WA forums are Ooc and unofficial, absent indication otherwise.
Please check out my roleplay thread The Battle of Glass Tears!
WA 101 Guides to GA authorship, campaigning, and more.

User avatar
A Bloodred Moon
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 418
Founded: Jan 13, 2019
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby A Bloodred Moon » Mon Feb 12, 2024 1:29 pm

The Ice States wrote:That said, I think many of the periods seem to include bad actors it would be a poor idea to include.

This is the only part of your post that matters, that you’re deliberately pushing for technical changes to the proposal on the basis of excluding players you disagree with, even players you yourself admit meet your bar as participants in the GA.
JoWhatup

Alpha Emeritus of Lone Wolves United - For Your Protection

User avatar
The Ice States
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2367
Founded: Jun 23, 2022
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby The Ice States » Mon Feb 12, 2024 1:32 pm

A Bloodred Moon wrote:
The Ice States wrote:That said, I think many of the periods seem to include bad actors it would be a poor idea to include.

This is the only part of your post that matters, that you’re deliberately pushing for technical changes to the proposal on the basis of excluding players you disagree with, even players you yourself admit meet your bar as participants in the GA.

Where did I "admit" this?
Last edited by The Ice States on Mon Feb 12, 2024 1:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Factbooks · 42x World Assembly Author · Festering Snakepit Wiki · Quincentenary Archive · GA Stat Effects Data

Immigration Officer, Greater Dienstad | Fmr. Minister of World Assembly Affairs, The North Pacific | GA Secretariat
Posts in the WA forums are Ooc and unofficial, absent indication otherwise.
Please check out my roleplay thread The Battle of Glass Tears!
WA 101 Guides to GA authorship, campaigning, and more.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Technical

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Nova Vinelandia, Pathosia

Advertisement

Remove ads