Suggested Modification of WA Endorsement System

[Tananat]

Instead you'd just need to buy stamps and send out mass campaign TGs, resulting in every man and his dog being able to pass bad resolutions. It might 'balance' the system, but it would also make the quality of resolutions worse and punish regions that have been successful in building their WA populations up.

Um, the voting after a proposal succeeds has no effect on how many people approve the proposal. When a proposal is sent into the lobby, it's 1 country, 1 approval.

Yes, note how I said 'pass' and not 'get to vote'.

[World Assembly Improvement Foundation]

Sorry, that's guesswork on your part. You don't know. We don't know. Nobody has the ability to poll the thousands of nations who vote each time. It's all speculative.

Challenge accepted.

Based on prior mod comment in regards to such activities, I will be sending out a mass telegram marked as WA campaign. This may possibly be the first time anyone has polled every WA member on why they voted a certain way, so I hope to gain data which can be used to further the improvement of the WA as a whole.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Sorry, that's guesswork on your part. You don't know. We don't know. Nobody has the ability to poll the thousands of nations who vote each time. It's all speculative.

Challenge accepted.

Based on prior mod comment in regards to such activities, I will be sending out a mass telegram marked as WA campaign. This may possibly be the first time anyone has polled every WA member on why they voted a certain way, so I hope to gain data which can be used to further the improvement of the WA as a whole.

Excidium Planetis, this is really not the place to use official-looking puppets.

[Libertarain Republicans]

Is this an assumption based off of the well known lemming effect, or is there a way to see the actual statistics more than the line graph that showed how the votes changed over time?
Edit: In terms of the idea itself, I definitely like it. I think that the idea can make a more balanced voting system, and that the "lemming effect" would not be very strong under this new vote tally, as having 1000 endorsements would still only give you 178 extra votes.

Instead you'd just need to buy stamps and send out mass campaign TGs, resulting in every man and his dog being able to pass bad resolutions. It might 'balance' the system, but it would also make the quality of resolutions worse and punish regions that have been successful in building their WA populations up.

Well, how does the resolution both get into vote and succeed if it's truly terrible? Mass Tg's for a resolution made by a dog would be playing on the stupidity of the entire WA body, would be expectant of all of them to approve the resolution, have 2 endorsements, and all vote in favor of it. That doesn't happen.

[Maljaratas]

Challenge accepted.

Based on prior mod comment in regards to such activities, I will be sending out a mass telegram marked as WA campaign. This may possibly be the first time anyone has polled every WA member on why they voted a certain way, so I hope to gain data which can be used to further the improvement of the WA as a whole.

Excidium Planetis, this is really not the place to use official-looking puppets.

Just an FYI, but as someone who received the telegram, it did contain this:

I am also obligated to inform you that "the words and opinions expressed in this telegram are solely those of the World Assembly Improvement Foundation, and are not intended to represent the official position of the WA itself, the Secretariat, or any other official WA organizations. (They are not intended to represent NationStates or Moderation either.)

[World Assembly Improvement Foundation]

Well, how does the resolution both get into vote and succeed if it's truly terrible? Mass Tg's for a resolution made by a dog would be playing on the stupidity of the entire WA body, would be expectant of all of them to approve the resolution, have 2 endorsements, and all vote in favor of it. That doesn't happen.

Well, the data so far indicates that a majority of both For and Against voters did not read the resolution text, or if they did, it did not factor into their vote.

While Nilla Wayfarers may appear so far (I've only gone through about 100 telegrams of the 500 or so I have received in response to my poll) to be correct in that more Lemming voters were Against, more For voters so far seem to have voted based on the title alone (reasons given being "I want the protection of nuclear armaments" or other meaningless reasons including the word "protection"). For those that reported having read the GA forum thread, Against is an overwhelming response. If Nilla wanted the For voters to be somehow more informed or well reasoned, it doesn't seem to be the case.

Interesting to note is that so far I have had 3 individuals say they didn't remember how they had voted. After looking through their activity feeds, all three had voted For. This may change later (3 is not a great sample), but as of right now it looks like the For voters are more prone to convenient amnesia, otherwise they cared so little about their vote they didn't even remember how or why they voted.

What the data says to me so far is that a dog can write a resolution and get it passed, if the title is nice and the delegates don't stack against it.

Just an FYI, but as someone who received the telegram, it did contain this:

I am also obligated to inform you that "the words and opinions expressed in this telegram are solely those of the World Assembly Improvement Foundation, and are not intended to represent the official position of the WA itself, the Secretariat, or any other official WA organizations. (They are not intended to represent NationStates or Moderation either.)

Based on past moderator comment (as part of a very lengthy debate about the ethics of using WAIF as a puppet) I am required to tack that on to the end of official looking telegrams. That's why it is also in my forum signature.

[Maljaratas]

Just an FYI, but as someone who received the telegram, it did contain this:

Based on past moderator comment (as part of a very lengthy debate about the ethics of using WAIF as a puppet) I am required to tack that on to the end of official looking telegrams. That's why it is also in my forum signature.

I'm aware of that. I was providing it to IA, since it wasn't sent to Europe.

[World Assembly Improvement Foundation]

Based on past moderator comment (as part of a very lengthy debate about the ethics of using WAIF as a puppet) I am required to tack that on to the end of official looking telegrams. That's why it is also in my forum signature.

I'm aware of that. I was providing it to IA, since it wasn't sent to Europe.

Europe has an Anti-WA spam agreement. Also, it saved me a dollar by not sending telegrams to Europe and 10000 Islands.

[The Candy Of Bottles]

I'm aware of that. I was providing it to IA, since it wasn't sent to Europe.

Europe has an Anti-WA spam agreement. Also, it saved me a dollar by not sending telegrams to Europe and 10000 Islands.

Screw that agreement. This isn't campaigning for or against a resolution anyway- I doubt they factored this kind of thing in in the first place.

[Nilla Wayfarers]

Is this an assumption based off of the well known lemming effect, or is there a way to see the actual statistics more than the line graph that showed how the votes changed over time?
Edit: In terms of the idea itself, I definitely like it. I think that the idea can make a more balanced voting system, and that the "lemming effect" would not be very strong under this new vote tally, as having 1000 endorsements would still only give you 178 extra votes.

Instead you'd just need to buy stamps and send out mass campaign TGs, resulting in every man and his dog being able to pass bad resolutions. It might 'balance' the system, but it would also make the quality of resolutions worse and punish regions that have been successful in building their WA populations up.

This is just as much guesswork as it is to assume why people vote. You can't substantiate this.

[World Assembly Improvement Foundation]

Europe has an Anti-WA spam agreement. Also, it saved me a dollar by not sending telegrams to Europe and 10000 Islands.

Screw that agreement. This isn't campaigning for or against a resolution anyway- I doubt they factored this kind of thing in in the first place.

Strangely enough, The North Pacific (which earlier withdrew from that agreement) blacklisted me for sending this telegram.

I find it hilarious, as they have my own guide on how to become a resolution author pinned on their regional forums.

This is just as much guesswork as it is to assume why people vote. You can't substantiate this.

It's not guesswork when you have data. About 600 telegrams of data, to be precise.

[Nilla Wayfarers]

This is just as much guesswork as it is to assume why people vote. You can't substantiate this.

It's not guesswork when you have data. About 600 telegrams of data, to be precise.

Well, they don't have any data to suggest the decline in the quality of resolutions.

[World Assembly Improvement Foundation]

It's not guesswork when you have data. About 600 telegrams of data, to be precise.

Well, they don't have any data to suggest the decline in the quality of resolutions.

You can extrapolate that from my data. If, when all the data has been sorted through, the data shows that large delegates were more informed and less prone to voting based on title, category, or "lemming effect", and the average WA voter was less informed and more prone to one of those reasons for voting, we can conclude that reducing delegate power will place more power into the hands of less informed voters, increasing the likelihood of poorer resolutions passing.

[Nilla Wayfarers]

Well, they don't have any data to suggest the decline in the quality of resolutions.

You can extrapolate that from my data. If, when all the data has been sorted through, the data shows that large delegates were more informed and less prone to voting based on title, category, or "lemming effect", and the average WA voter was less informed and more prone to one of those reasons for voting, we can conclude that reducing delegate power will place more power into the hands of less informed voters, increasing the likelihood of poorer resolutions passing.

Neither the lemming effect nor poor reading of the resolution inherently means a bad resolution is more likely to pass. It just means that an uninformed or ignorant voter is more likely to vote contrary to how they would if they read the resolution properly.

[World Assembly Improvement Foundation]

You can extrapolate that from my data. If, when all the data has been sorted through, the data shows that large delegates were more informed and less prone to voting based on title, category, or "lemming effect", and the average WA voter was less informed and more prone to one of those reasons for voting, we can conclude that reducing delegate power will place more power into the hands of less informed voters, increasing the likelihood of poorer resolutions passing.

Neither the lemming effect nor poor reading of the resolution inherently means a bad resolution is more likely to pass. It just means that an uninformed or ignorant voter is more likely to vote contrary to how they would if they read the resolution properly.

That's exactly the point. Uninformed voters are more likely to vote contrary to how they would if they read a resolution properly.

Bad resolutions, read properly, would merit an against vote. But uninformed voters, voting contrary to that, would vote for. Thus, by your own statements, uninformed voters are more likely to vote for bad resolutions.

Any system which places more power into the hands of uninformed voters is therefore more likely to result in bad resolutions passing.

[World Assembly Improvement Foundation]

I must say, though, I am quite alarmed at the influence the delegates of The North Pacific and The Pacific have over their voters. Nearly all of the Against voters so far who attributed their vote to the way their delegate voted have come from these two regions.

According to some poll responders, TNP's delegate even sends out messages on which way to vote? Can anybody else in TNP verify this?

[Imperium Anglorum]

I must say, though, I am quite alarmed at the influence the delegates of The North Pacific and The Pacific have over their voters. Nearly all of the Against voters so far who attributed their vote to the way their delegate voted have come from these two regions.

This ought not be surprising. Regional government provide many number of services for their citizens. This isn't control so much as it is influence cultivated by an effective bureaucracy with the support of its citizens (the region is able to administer and its inhabitants willing to vote). Quite a lot of people vote in line with how their Delegates vote, solely because it is one of the easily observable pieces of information. Getting a telegram reminding someone to vote (thereby increasing turnout, which might also be a large part of bias in this sample, already ignoring the response bias this data would already have), is just icing on the cake. And turnout campaigns ought not be looked down upon, unless one is truly philosophically inconsistent; I think they're quite good for promoting activity in the World Assembly.

[New Axiom]

Math...my brain...hurts...

Oh god my computer is covered in exploded brain.

But yes! End the Mega-Delegates!

[Imperium Anglorum]

The North Pacific (which earlier withdrew from that agreement) blacklisted me for sending this telegram.

I do hope you realise that the repeals of the Accord aren't meant to be anything more than symbolic. I told everyone this quite a while ago, saying that these policies have long been de facto truths in regional governments and that repeal of the Accord would do nothing to change that (well, it certainly has made the fact that they are de facto law less observable, which makes it harder for people to have consistent expectations about this).

[Wallenburg]

Instead you'd just need to buy stamps and send out mass campaign TGs, resulting in every man and his dog being able to pass bad resolutions. It might 'balance' the system, but it would also make the quality of resolutions worse and punish regions that have been successful in building their WA populations up.

Well, how does the resolution both get into vote and succeed if it's truly terrible? Mass Tg's for a resolution made by a dog would be playing on the stupidity of the entire WA body, would be expectant of all of them to approve the resolution, have 2 endorsements, and all vote in favor of it. That doesn't happen.

All you have to do to get to vote is to have something that is arguably legal and to run a campaign for it. Getting it to succeed requires some semblance of quality, although we have certainly seen some terrible policies get through.

Sorry, that's guesswork on your part. You don't know. We don't know. Nobody has the ability to poll the thousands of nations who vote each time. It's all speculative.

Everyone knows the lemming effect exists. It's not guesswork, it is well-established fact.

[The Northern Light]

I must say, though, I am quite alarmed at the influence the delegates of The North Pacific and The Pacific have over their voters. Nearly all of the Against voters so far who attributed their vote to the way their delegate voted have come from these two regions.

According to some poll responders, TNP's delegate even sends out messages on which way to vote? Can anybody else in TNP verify this?

TNP has had an "Information for Voters" program, run by the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs. It has been in place on and off since 2012, and was actively maintained for parts of 2012, from mid-2013 to early 2015 , and from mid-2016 to now.

As part of the program, every time a resolution goes to vote, TNP WA nations are telegrammed a reminder to vote, a vote recommendation, and analysis of the resolution. More recently, these have also been posted in dispatches. A compilation of all recommendations produced in the program's current incarnation (since mid-2014) is available here.

---

As to why this is "alarming" or surprising, I have no idea. TNP has had a strong focus on boosting all kinds of WA activity for years now, which is the reason why we excel in all WA statistics.

Increasing voter turnout is part of this strategy, and the IFV program has proven to be quite effective in achieving that.

Additionally, the IFVs provide our WA nations with analysis to help them make an informed decision (which does not have to be the same as the recommendation, nations are not penalized if they vote the other way). In gameside surveys we have run in the past, WA nations have consistently responded that they find the IFV telegrams helpful and informative, and that want the program to continue.

Finally, it's worth noting that the vote recommendations and the resolution review are not decided by the delegate alone, but collectively by the staff of the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs (which, naturally, the delegate is part of). The staff is numerous, and all TNP citizens are welcome to join.

EDIT: This is HMS Unicorn. I forgot to switch out of this puppet before posting.

[Imperium Anglorum]

TNP has had an "Information for Voters" program, run by the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs. It has been in place on and off since 2012, and was actively maintained for parts of 2012, from mid-2013 to early 2015 , and from mid-2016 to now.

As part of the program, every time a resolution goes to vote, TNP WA nations are telegrammed a reminder to vote, a vote recommendation, and analysis of the resolution. More recently, these have also been posted in dispatches. A compilation of all recommendations produced in the program's current incarnation (since mid-2014) is available here.

---

As to why this is "alarming" or surprising, I have no idea. TNP has had a strong focus on boosting all kinds of WA activity for years now, which is the reason why we excel in all WA statistics.

Increasing voter turnout is part of this strategy, and the IFV program has proven to be quite effective in achieving that.

Additionally, the IFVs provide our WA nations with analysis to help them make an informed decision (which does not have to be the same as the recommendation, nations are not penalized if they vote the other way). In gameside surveys we have run in the past, WA nations have consistently responded that they find the IFV telegrams helpful and informative, and that want the program to continue.

Finally, it's worth noting that the vote recommendations and the resolution review are not decided by the delegate alone, but collectively by the staff of the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs (which, naturally, the delegate is part of). The staff is numerous, and all TNP citizens are welcome to join.

EDIT: This is HMS Unicorn. I forgot to switch out of this puppet before posting.

Hear, hear. I don't see why people are so concerned about regions helping to increase the amount of information which voters receive.

[Nilla Wayfarers]

TNP has had an "Information for Voters" program, run by the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs. It has been in place on and off since 2012, and was actively maintained for parts of 2012, from mid-2013 to early 2015 , and from mid-2016 to now.

As part of the program, every time a resolution goes to vote, TNP WA nations are telegrammed a reminder to vote, a vote recommendation, and analysis of the resolution. More recently, these have also been posted in dispatches. A compilation of all recommendations produced in the program's current incarnation (since mid-2014) is available here.

---

As to why this is "alarming" or surprising, I have no idea. TNP has had a strong focus on boosting all kinds of WA activity for years now, which is the reason why we excel in all WA statistics.

Increasing voter turnout is part of this strategy, and the IFV program has proven to be quite effective in achieving that.

Additionally, the IFVs provide our WA nations with analysis to help them make an informed decision (which does not have to be the same as the recommendation, nations are not penalized if they vote the other way). In gameside surveys we have run in the past, WA nations have consistently responded that they find the IFV telegrams helpful and informative, and that want the program to continue.

Finally, it's worth noting that the vote recommendations and the resolution review are not decided by the delegate alone, but collectively by the staff of the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs (which, naturally, the delegate is part of). The staff is numerous, and all TNP citizens are welcome to join.

EDIT: This is HMS Unicorn. I forgot to switch out of this puppet before posting.

Hear, hear. I don't see why people are so concerned about regions helping to increase the amount of information which voters receive.

That's not the concern here. The concern is if programs like these lead non-delegate nations to vote yea or nay simply because their delegate suggests it.

[Tananat]

Hear, hear. I don't see why people are so concerned about regions helping to increase the amount of information which voters receive.

That's not the concern here. The concern is if programs like these lead non-delegate nations to vote yea or nay simply because their delegate suggests it.

I don't see how that would be an issue.

[Nilla Wayfarers]

That's not the concern here. The concern is if programs like these lead non-delegate nations to vote yea or nay simply because their delegate suggests it.

I don't see how that would be an issue.

Voting improperly is an issue.