NATION

PASSWORD

Quorum approvals should be set per-region, not per-Delegate

Bug reports, general help, ideas for improvements, and questions about how things are meant to work.
User avatar
ShrewLlamaLand
Diplomat
 
Posts: 853
Founded: Nov 30, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Quorum approvals should be set per-region, not per-Delegate

Postby ShrewLlamaLand » Mon Apr 13, 2020 10:57 am

Proposal approvals should be set per-region, not per-Delegate, and should not automatically be reset if the region's WA Delegate changes (unless, of course, the new Delegate manually removes their region's approval).

The fundamental principles behind the approval system would not change: approvals would still need to be made by the WA Delegate, and a region must still have a WA Delegate in order to approve resolutions, to prevent puppet regions abusing the system.

The reason behind my thread advocating for this change was demonstrated by my recent proposal, "Condemn The World Assembly Elite", which failed to reach quorum after a series of raids.

The proposal reached 71 approvals, one short of quorum at the time, shortly before the major update of 10/04/2020, as shown here:
Image


On each of the next four updates, members of raiding organisations from four feeder regions: The Pacific, The North Pacific, The West Pacific, and the East Pacific; Balder, and The Black Hawks participated in raids against smaller regions who had approved the proposal. The only motive behind these raids was to remove the WA Delegate, and hence remove their approval of this resolution. Under the current system, the Delegate's approval is removed when the WA Delegate of a given region changes, and is not automatically re-approved if this nation regains the Delegacy.

This series of screenshots shows the number of approvals decreasing after each of the four updates:
Image
Image
Image
Image


For full details, my forum post regarding these raids is here:
viewtopic.php?p=36954898#p36954898

Overall, a total of 85 WA Delegates approved the proposal throughout the 3 days it spent in the proposal queue, however, it was ultimately removed at the end of this time with about 35 approvals. Approximately 45 small regions were raided a total of 70 times (some were raided two or three times each) in coordinated attacks by the six regions mentioned above.


The rationale behind this change is simple: the quorum system is designed to limit the influence of large regions, and their WA Delegates, by giving all regions, through their WA Delegate, an equal say on which proposals reach quorum and are thus voted on in the World Assembly. Quorum raiding fundamentally adds another layer of bias towards large regions and their WA Delegates, as large regions can simply raid smaller regions to remove their approval. Note that the CCD was never raided to remove me as Delegate, despite me being the author, because of the large gap (~50 endorsements) between myself and the next nation. Large regions are effectively impossible to raid, and thus their approvals cannot be removed in this way.

This mechanic also allows raiders to greatly influence matters of the World Assembly, which should not be the case given the "The World Assembly is the world's governing body."


One could make the argument "but the new WA Delegate can simply reapprove the proposal". This is technically true, but in practice does not work for a variety of reasons: many Delegates are not active enough to constantly reapprove proposals, the new Delegate may not be familiar with the approval process, and the returning Delegate (at the next update) may not even be aware their vote had been reset.

Finally, the "Proposals" page could also be updated to show approval by region rather than approving Delegate, or perhaps a switch to toggle between approval by WA Delegate/region.


Cheers,
ShrewLlamaLand


Edit: I'd add that the WA Delegate approvals don't necessarily need to be changed so that they're tied to the region, although that would make the biggest difference.

If their approval was simply saved so that if a nation regains the WA Delegacy at the next update they'd automatically re-approve, that'd probably solve 80% of the problem.
Last edited by ShrewLlamaLand on Mon Apr 13, 2020 1:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ShrewLlamaLand
Confederation of Corrupt Dictators | Commission to the World Assembly

"The flag once raised will never fall!"

User avatar
Bowzin
Envoy
 
Posts: 301
Founded: Aug 13, 2018
Libertarian Police State

Postby Bowzin » Mon Apr 13, 2020 12:06 pm

What happens when people resign as delegate after approving it? The region stays in approval mode and the they can WA up in another puppet region and approve it again? and again? now you have a mechanic where 2 WAs can switch accounts over and over and mass approve a resolution
Bowzin Vytherov-Skollvaldr
| On a Redemption Arc. |
We dropped a new resume dispatch!

User avatar
ShrewLlamaLand
Diplomat
 
Posts: 853
Founded: Nov 30, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby ShrewLlamaLand » Mon Apr 13, 2020 12:10 pm

Bowzin wrote:What happens when people resign as delegate after approving it? The region stays in approval mode and the they can WA up in another puppet region and approve it again? and again? now you have a mechanic where 2 WAs can switch accounts over and over and mass approve a resolution

No, effectively all I am suggesting is that proposal approval is given per region and not reset if the WA Delegate changes.

If a region does not have a WA Delegate, then they don't get to approve proposals, just like in the current system. If a WA Delegate approving a resolution loses Delegate status and no one replaces them, then their approval would be dropped as it does currently.
ShrewLlamaLand
Confederation of Corrupt Dictators | Commission to the World Assembly

"The flag once raised will never fall!"

User avatar
Pangurstan
Diplomat
 
Posts: 619
Founded: Aug 20, 2017
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Pangurstan » Mon Apr 13, 2020 12:12 pm

What’s stopping raiders from installing a raider as delegate of the regions that approved the resolution and manually unapproving the resolution?
among us


April is the cruelest month, breeding
Lilacs out of a dead land, mixing
Memory and desire, stirring
Dull roots with spring rain.

User avatar
Bowzin
Envoy
 
Posts: 301
Founded: Aug 13, 2018
Libertarian Police State

Postby Bowzin » Mon Apr 13, 2020 12:14 pm

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:
Bowzin wrote:What happens when people resign as delegate after approving it? The region stays in approval mode and the they can WA up in another puppet region and approve it again? and again? now you have a mechanic where 2 WAs can switch accounts over and over and mass approve a resolution

No, effectively all I am suggesting is that proposal approval is given per region and not reset if the WA Delegate changes.

If a region does not have a WA Delegate, then they don't get to approve proposals, just like in the current system. If a WA Delegate approving a resolution loses Delegate status and no one replaces them, then their approval would be dropped as it does currently.

You still have regions with low endorsement counts that aren't very active. You could hit those, resign, and the native would be re-instated but your approval would stand. Still a way to mass approve a resolution, only now you need one extra guy.
Bowzin Vytherov-Skollvaldr
| On a Redemption Arc. |
We dropped a new resume dispatch!

User avatar
Tinhampton
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13701
Founded: Oct 05, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Tinhampton » Mon Apr 13, 2020 12:15 pm

What happens if Delegate A approves a proposal but is then ousted by Delegate B, who wishes to re-approve the proposal?
The Self-Administrative City of TINHAMPTON (pop. 329,537): Saffron Howard, Mayor (UCP); Alexander Smith, WA Delegate-Ambassador

Authorships & co-authorships: SC#250, SC#251, Issue #1115, SC#267, GA#484, GA#491, GA#533, GA#540, GA#549, SC#356, GA#559, GA#562, GA#567, GA#578, SC#374, GA#582, SC#375, GA#589, GA#590, SC#382, SC#385*, GA#597, GA#607, SC#415, GA#647, GA#656, GA#664, GA#671, GA#674, GA#675, GA#677, GA#680, Issue #1580, GA#682, GA#683, GA#684, GA#692, GA#693, GA#715
The rest of my CV: Cup of Harmony 73 champions; Philosopher-Queen of Sophia; *author of the most popular SC Res. ever; anti-NPO cabalist in good standing; 48yo Tory woman w/Asperger's; Cambridge graduate ~ currently reading The World by Simon Sebag Montefiore

User avatar
Reploid Productions
Director of Moderation
 
Posts: 30511
Founded: Antiquity
Democratic Socialists

Postby Reploid Productions » Mon Apr 13, 2020 12:17 pm

CAPTAIN BUZZKILL IS HERE TO RUIN YOUR DAY!

*ahem*

What I mean to say is that there is no way in hell the techies will go for this. To quote my post over in your guys' regional thread:
Reploid Productions wrote:It's an unconventional use of legal game mechanics that has been heavily politicized, but then most of modern Gameplay stems originally from "unconventional uses of legal game mechanics". Given this is a political simulator and "military action to enforce a sphere of global influence" falls well within the scope of regional politicking, so long as nobody's using WA multies to do it, moderation has no reason to intervene.

It's a form of politicking. The boss loves seeing players come up with new ways to engage in politicking, perhaps best illustrated by this conversation in the lair when people were starting to complain about players offering trading card bribes for votes during April Fools:
Moderator: "Ooh, we're getting some interplay between the cards crowd and the election! Dirty bribery and corruption already!"
Max: "awesome"


This is a solution looking for a problem that does not exist.

CAPTAIN BUZZKILL AWAAAAAAAAAAAY!

Image
~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod CAPTAIN BUZZKILL
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku
Forum mod since May 8, 2003 -- Game mod since May 19, 2003 -- Nation turned 20 on March 23, 2023!
Sunset's DoGA FAQ - For those using DoGA to make their NS military and such.
One Stop Rules Shop -- Reppy's Sig Workshop -- Getting Help Page
[violet] wrote:Maybe we could power our new search engine from the sexual tension between you two.
Char Aznable/Giant Meteor 2024! - Forcing humanity to move into space and progress whether we goddamn want to or not!

User avatar
ShrewLlamaLand
Diplomat
 
Posts: 853
Founded: Nov 30, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby ShrewLlamaLand » Mon Apr 13, 2020 12:21 pm

I guess this got posted on the NSGP Discord or something considering the sudden buzz of activity.

Pangurstan wrote:What’s stopping raiders from installing a raider as delegate of the regions that approved the resolution and manually unapproving the resolution?

It requires more endorsements, and much more effort, than endorsing a native. A set of say, a dozen raiders, would only be able to raid a couple of regions rather than dozens in a single update.

It's not a perfect solution but it would definitely cut down on the amount of abuse possible.

Bowzin wrote:
ShrewLlamaLand wrote:No, effectively all I am suggesting is that proposal approval is given per region and not reset if the WA Delegate changes.

If a region does not have a WA Delegate, then they don't get to approve proposals, just like in the current system. If a WA Delegate approving a resolution loses Delegate status and no one replaces them, then their approval would be dropped as it does currently.

You still have regions with low endorsement counts that aren't very active. You could hit those, resign, and the native would be re-instated but your approval would stand. Still a way to mass approve a resolution, only now you need one extra guy.

Possible but unlikely, see above, you need more endorsements to install a raider as Delegate instead of just endorsing a native.

Tinhampton wrote:What happens if Delegate A approves a proposal but is then ousted by Delegate B, who wishes to re-approve the proposal?

The proposal would already be approved, they wouldn't need to re-approve it.
ShrewLlamaLand
Confederation of Corrupt Dictators | Commission to the World Assembly

"The flag once raised will never fall!"

User avatar
Lord Dominator
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8900
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Right-wing Utopia

Postby Lord Dominator » Mon Apr 13, 2020 1:06 pm

Bowzin is on the right track with approval creation, except that this would just make the current method of creating a bunch of temporary delegates easier since we wouldn't need them to remain the delegate. Half a dozen (three teams) of competent raiders could probably make quorum in an update, with no campaigning needed.
Edit: Misread a thing, no changes to the existing puppet region & delegate method occur under the proposed system.

Tying approvals to regions would make bumping harder, though I suspect in many cases the delegate endorsements are still low enough to make it possible (and let's be honest, the sheer number of people who dislike CCD makes that a low bar).

Unrelated note, but the only region you listed that is actually raider is TBH. The rest, at least in theory, do defender things at some point or another (or in the case of TP, largely just anti-fash things).
Last edited by Lord Dominator on Mon Apr 13, 2020 1:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
ShrewLlamaLand
Diplomat
 
Posts: 853
Founded: Nov 30, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby ShrewLlamaLand » Mon Apr 13, 2020 1:33 pm

I'd add that the WA Delegate approvals don't even necessarily need to be changed so that they're tied to the region.

If their approval was simply saved so that if a nation regains the WA Delegacy at the next update they'd automatically re-approve, that'd probably solve 80% of the problem.

Lord Dominator wrote:Unrelated note, but the only region you listed that is actually raider is TBH. The rest, at least in theory, do defender things at some point or another (or in the case of TP, largely just anti-fash things).

Not really relevant, but yes, I know - I specifically mentioned "raiding organisations from xxxx". The Pacifics are not primarily raiding regions but do have relatively large raiding forces.

Lord Dominator wrote:Edit: Misread a thing, no changes to the existing puppet region & delegate method occur under the proposed system.

Tying approvals to regions would make bumping harder, though I suspect in many cases the delegate endorsements are still low enough to make it possible (and let's be honest, the sheer number of people who dislike CCD makes that a low bar).

The goal would not necessarily be to completely remove this as a gameplay tactic, but make it much harder to achieve. When half a dozen raiders can knock off over a dozen Delegates in a single update, it's just too easy to abuse.

As an example, the CCD does not have an active raiding force but I'm pretty sure with a bit of coordination on our Discord server I could knock "Condemn Nations Creating Regions For SC Props" out of quorum at the next update if I really wanted to (I don't).

If after these changes it was still too easy to achieve, a cooldown could be added before a WA Delegate can approve/unapprove proposals. There exists a similar cooldown for new regional officers on sending region-wide telegrams after they're promoted. A similar but shorter cooldown (say, 1 hour) implemented on new Delegates would effectively end this abuse as the new Delegate would need to stay in the region with their WA Membership for the full update and would no longer be able to participate in raids.
ShrewLlamaLand
Confederation of Corrupt Dictators | Commission to the World Assembly

"The flag once raised will never fall!"

User avatar
LollerLand
Diplomat
 
Posts: 637
Founded: May 15, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby LollerLand » Mon Apr 13, 2020 1:42 pm

Reploid Productions wrote:This is a solution looking for a problem that does not exist.

This.
Loller Kingsmoreaux Corleone
WA Delegate, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Lord of Autumn of The Autumnal Court of Caer Sidi

User avatar
Lord Dominator
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8900
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Right-wing Utopia

Postby Lord Dominator » Mon Apr 13, 2020 1:50 pm

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:I'd add that the WA Delegate approvals don't even necessarily need to be changed so that they're tied to the region.

If their approval was simply saved so that if a nation regains the WA Delegacy at the next update they'd automatically re-approve, that'd probably solve 80% of the problem.

Again, that'd make it more difficult as the bumping would need to be redone, but doesn't particularly stop the kind of dedication you face. Would also entail ascribing extra perks to someone who isn't naturally a RO otherwise, which I imagine would be a sticking point with admin.
The goal would not necessarily be to completely remove this as a gameplay tactic, but make it much harder to achieve. When half a dozen raiders can knock off over a dozen Delegates in a single update, it's just too easy to abuse.

Mods/admins would seem to disagree.
As an example, the CCD does not have an active raiding force but I'm pretty sure with a bit of coordination on our Discord server I could knock "Condemn Nations Creating Regions For SC Props" out of quorum at the next update if I really wanted to (I don't).

Doubtful to my mind, but for reasons irrelevant to this conversation (that is, raiding is rather hard to do without knowing what you're doing & facing competent defender opposition).
If after these changes it was still too easy to achieve.

See Reppy's post on the likelihood of this first change happening.

User avatar
ShrewLlamaLand
Diplomat
 
Posts: 853
Founded: Nov 30, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby ShrewLlamaLand » Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:03 pm

Lord Dominator wrote:
ShrewLlamaLand wrote:I'd add that the WA Delegate approvals don't even necessarily need to be changed so that they're tied to the region.

If their approval was simply saved so that if a nation regains the WA Delegacy at the next update they'd automatically re-approve, that'd probably solve 80% of the problem.

Again, that'd make it more difficult as the bumping would need to be redone, but doesn't particularly stop the kind of dedication you face. Would also entail ascribing extra perks to someone who isn't naturally a RO otherwise, which I imagine would be a sticking point with admin.

It would mean that raiders need to conduct the same raid six times, one for each update, instead of once. Six times the combined manpower to pull this off.

Your point regarding the complexity of implementing this for game admins may well be correct, I couldn't comment on that.

Lord Dominator wrote:
ShrewLlamaLand wrote:The goal would not necessarily be to completely remove this as a gameplay tactic, but make it much harder to achieve. When half a dozen raiders can knock off over a dozen Delegates in a single update, it's just too easy to abuse.

Mods/admins would seem to disagree.

One mod/admin would seem to disagree.

Lord Dominator wrote:
ShrewLlamaLand wrote:As an example, the CCD does not have an active raiding force but I'm pretty sure with a bit of coordination on our Discord server I could knock "Condemn Nations Creating Regions For SC Props" out of quorum at the next update if I really wanted to (I don't).

Doubtful to my mind, but for reasons irrelevant to this conversation (that is, raiding is rather hard to do without knowing what you're doing & facing competent defender opposition).

The CCD has had experience with raiding/defending in the past, and I promise you I know more than you think I do.

I went through the list of delegates approving "Condemn Nations Creating Regions For SC Props" as an example, and with a group of seven raiders there's over 50 regions we could target. Even if defenders happened to spot these raids occuring at the time and were able to react quickly enough, you'd either need a very large force or a lot of luck in guessing which of these 50 we'd be going to target next.

To succeed, we'd only need to get 18/50, and this particular proposal is well over quorum which is not always the case.
ShrewLlamaLand
Confederation of Corrupt Dictators | Commission to the World Assembly

"The flag once raised will never fall!"

User avatar
LollerLand
Diplomat
 
Posts: 637
Founded: May 15, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby LollerLand » Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:13 pm

Everyone knows the reasons behind your rants in GP and SC and this solution of yours for a problem that doesn't exist, your adversaries in game are stronger and better than you at using in game mechanisms to thwart your plans. Use your creativity to get ahead in the game using the existing game mechanics while following the existing rules rather than trying to get the game mechanics/rules changed just to suit your needs.
Loller Kingsmoreaux Corleone
WA Delegate, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Lord of Autumn of The Autumnal Court of Caer Sidi

User avatar
Lord Dominator
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8900
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Right-wing Utopia

Postby Lord Dominator » Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:18 pm

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:
Lord Dominator wrote:Again, that'd make it more difficult as the bumping would need to be redone, but doesn't particularly stop the kind of dedication you face. Would also entail ascribing extra perks to someone who isn't naturally a RO otherwise, which I imagine would be a sticking point with admin.

It would mean that raiders need to conduct the same raid six times, one for each update, instead of once. Six times the combined manpower to pull this off.

Generally, yes. Which is why I did say it'd be more difficult, but didn't say it'd be impossible.
Your point regarding the complexity of implementing this for game admins may well be correct, I couldn't comment on that.

It was a comment on admin willingness, not complexity. I don't think the admins would implement that specific tech proposal.
Lord Dominator wrote:Mods/admins would seem to disagree.

One mod/admin would seem to disagree.

Who and where?
Lord Dominator wrote:Doubtful to my mind, but for reasons irrelevant to this conversation (that is, raiding is rather hard to do without knowing what you're doing & facing competent defender opposition).

The CCD has had experience with raiding/defending in the past, and I promise you I know more than you think I do.

I'm aware that you all do, and don't think I'm underestimating your experience, particularly in this matter.
I went through the list of delegates approving "Condemn Nations Creating Regions For SC Props" as an example, and with a group of seven raiders there's over 50 regions we could target. Even if defenders happened to spot these raids occuring at the time and were able to react quickly enough, you'd either need a very large force or a lot of luck in guessing which of these 50 we'd be going to target next.

To succeed, we'd only need to get 18/50, and this particular proposal is well over quorum which is not always the case.

According to my knowledge of TBH raiding right now, defenders are actually fielding a force of equivalent size to those 7 at many updates. They don't need to know your targets of course, just watch for your jumps & immediately move (which they can do within seconds). I'm sure you could get the hang of it eventually, but I don't think that'd time is soon.

User avatar
ShrewLlamaLand
Diplomat
 
Posts: 853
Founded: Nov 30, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby ShrewLlamaLand » Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:38 pm

LollerLand wrote:Everyone knows the reasons behind your rants in GP and SC and this solution of yours for a problem that doesn't exist, your adversaries in game are stronger and better than you at using in game mechanisms to thwart your plans. Use your creativity to get ahead in the game using the existing game mechanics while following the existing rules rather than trying to get the game mechanics/rules changed just to suit your needs.

Whether or not the current system "suits my needs" is irrelevant.

I fully justified why I suggested this change in the OP:

The rationale behind this change is simple: the quorum system is designed to limit the influence of large regions, and their WA Delegates, by giving all regions, through their WA Delegate, an equal say on which proposals reach quorum and are thus voted on in the World Assembly. Quorum raiding fundamentally adds another layer of bias towards large regions and their WA Delegates, as large regions can simply raid smaller regions to remove their approval. Note that the CCD was never raided to remove me as Delegate, despite me being the author, because of the large gap (~50 endorsements) between myself and the next nation. Large regions are effectively impossible to raid, and thus their approvals cannot be removed in this way.

This mechanic also allows raiders to greatly influence matters of the World Assembly, which should not be the case given the "The World Assembly is the world's governing body."



Lord Dominator wrote:
ShrewLlamaLand wrote:It would mean that raiders need to conduct the same raid six times, one for each update, instead of once. Six times the combined manpower to pull this off.

Generally, yes. Which is why I did say it'd be more difficult, but didn't say it'd be impossible.

It doesn't need to be impossible, just difficult enough to be impractical.

Lord Dominator wrote:
ShrewLlamaLand wrote:Your point regarding the complexity of implementing this for game admins may well be correct, I couldn't comment on that.

It was a comment on admin willingness, not complexity. I don't think the admins would implement that specific tech proposal.

Again, that may be well correct, I can't really comment.

Lord Dominator wrote:
ShrewLlamaLand wrote:One mod/admin would seem to disagree.

Who and where?

The only one who has commented here?

Lord Dominator wrote:
ShrewLlamaLand wrote:I went through the list of delegates approving "Condemn Nations Creating Regions For SC Props" as an example, and with a group of seven raiders there's over 50 regions we could target. Even if defenders happened to spot these raids occuring at the time and were able to react quickly enough, you'd either need a very large force or a lot of luck in guessing which of these 50 we'd be going to target next.

To succeed, we'd only need to get 18/50, and this particular proposal is well over quorum which is not always the case.

According to my knowledge of TBH raiding right now, defenders are actually fielding a force of equivalent size to those 7 at many updates. They don't need to know your targets of course, just watch for your jumps & immediately move (which they can do within seconds). I'm sure you could get the hang of it eventually, but I don't think that'd time is soon.

Watch for our jumps from where?
ShrewLlamaLand
Confederation of Corrupt Dictators | Commission to the World Assembly

"The flag once raised will never fall!"

User avatar
Frisbeeteria
Senior Game Moderator
 
Posts: 27796
Founded: Dec 16, 2003
Capitalizt

Postby Frisbeeteria » Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:50 pm

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:One mod/admin would seem to disagree.

Do we all have to individually post here telling you that it won't happen? If we did, would you abandon this idiocy, or would you still continue anyway? You have an extensive history of ignoring criticism of your ideas while somehow imagining that everyone who hasn't responded actually agrees with you.

This is a bad idea. It adds nothing and is easy to bypass. You should drop it.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 12659
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:52 pm

Can we have quorum approvals weighted by endorsements instead? It would also solve the problem of being unable to get things to vote due to raider activity. Large delegates can't be effectively raided in the quantities needed to prevent something from getting to quorum.
Last edited by Imperium Anglorum on Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Author: 1 SC and 56+ GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
GenSec (24 Dec 2021 –); posts not official unless so indicated
Delegate for Europe
Elsie Mortimer Wellesley
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Twice-commended toxic villainous globalist kittehs

User avatar
Cosmosplosion
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 188
Founded: Jun 25, 2014
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Cosmosplosion » Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:55 pm

Keep it the way it is. Just because someone is a bit salty because what a certain region did to prevent their proposal from getting to the floor doesn't mean we should blow it all up. The system works great as is.
Former Minister of World Assembly Affairs - The North Pacific
Former WA Delegate - The Versutian Federation
Author of GAR #459 - On Tobacco and Electronic Cigarettes
I don't care if I fall as long as someone else picks up my gun and keeps on shooting. - Che Guevara


Economic Left/Right: -7.5
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.67

User avatar
ShrewLlamaLand
Diplomat
 
Posts: 853
Founded: Nov 30, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby ShrewLlamaLand » Mon Apr 13, 2020 3:04 pm

Frisbeeteria wrote:
ShrewLlamaLand wrote:One mod/admin would seem to disagree.

Do we all have to individually post here telling you that it won't happen? If we did, would you abandon this idiocy, or would you still continue anyway? You have an extensive history of ignoring criticism of your ideas while somehow imagining that everyone who hasn't responded actually agrees with you.

This is a bad idea. It adds nothing and is easy to bypass. You should drop it.

Can you please explain how this would "add nothing"? It would prevent raiders from being able to raid dozens of regions in a single update to remove their approvals. I don't disagree that what I've suggested would be easy to bypass.

I only posted this to offer a very basic suggestion for fixing a problem regarding a tactic that I strongly suspect will start to become more widespread. Of course my suggestion shouldn't be taken as final and should be modified and improved if this becomes a major issue.

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Can we have quorum approvals weighted by endorsements instead? It would also solve the problem of being unable to get things to vote due to raider activity. Large delegates can't be effectively raided in the quantities needed to prevent something from getting to quorum.

Funny.
ShrewLlamaLand
Confederation of Corrupt Dictators | Commission to the World Assembly

"The flag once raised will never fall!"

User avatar
Morover
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1557
Founded: Oct 14, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Morover » Mon Apr 13, 2020 3:08 pm

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Can we have quorum approvals weighted by endorsements instead? It would also solve the problem of being unable to get things to vote due to raider activity. Large delegates can't be effectively raided in the quantities needed to prevent something from getting to quorum.

Funny.

What if they admins got rid of weighted votes in the actual voting and implemented IA's suggestion? That solves the issue you have with the overwhelming voting power of large delegates and your concern over raiders having too much influence with how approvals work.

Of course, I say this in jest, but still felt it warranted a response.
World Assembly Author
ns.morover@gmail.com

User avatar
ShrewLlamaLand
Diplomat
 
Posts: 853
Founded: Nov 30, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby ShrewLlamaLand » Mon Apr 13, 2020 3:14 pm

Morover wrote:
ShrewLlamaLand wrote:Funny.

What if they admins got rid of weighted votes in the actual voting and implemented IA's suggestion? That solves the issue you have with the overwhelming voting power of large delegates and your concern over raiders having too much influence with how approvals work.

Of course, I say this in jest, but still felt it warranted a response.

I assume you mean that each nation would be given only a single vote once a proposal reaches the voting floor? No Delegate votes at all?

I actually don't mind this idea. It'd be better than the current voting system overall, just as long as the relative weighting of large Delegate approvals is set right.
ShrewLlamaLand
Confederation of Corrupt Dictators | Commission to the World Assembly

"The flag once raised will never fall!"

User avatar
Lord Dominator
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8900
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Right-wing Utopia

Postby Lord Dominator » Mon Apr 13, 2020 3:27 pm

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:It doesn't need to be impossible, just difficult enough to be impractical.

K
Lord Dominator wrote:Who and where?

The only one who has commented here?

The only one who had commented at the time was Reppy, who said that the techies are not going to go for it.
Lord Dominator wrote:According to my knowledge of TBH raiding right now, defenders are actually fielding a force of equivalent size to those 7 at many updates. They don't need to know your targets of course, just watch for your jumps & immediately move (which they can do within seconds). I'm sure you could get the hang of it eventually, but I don't think that'd time is soon.

Watch for our jumps from where?

Libcord I assume, I am not clear on precisely how defenders watch for raiding activity (not bring a defender), just that they do and are very good at it.

User avatar
ShrewLlamaLand
Diplomat
 
Posts: 853
Founded: Nov 30, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby ShrewLlamaLand » Mon Apr 13, 2020 4:52 pm

Lord Dominator wrote:
ShrewLlamaLand wrote:It doesn't need to be impossible, just difficult enough to be impractical.

K

It's entirely possible for raiders, or any large region for that matter, to simply create a bunch of regions each with 2 WA Members to mass approve a proposal and get it to quorum. To my knowledge this has never actually been an issue because, while not impossible, it's definitely impractical to do so.

Now that this Delegate bumping method has been openly used against my proposal, I guarantee large regions are going to start taking advantage of it to knock proposals out of the queue that they strongly disapprove of.

Lord Dominator wrote:
ShrewLlamaLand wrote:Watch for our jumps from where?

Libcord I assume, I am not clear on precisely how defenders watch for raiding activity (not bring a defender), just that they do and are very good at it.

Hmmm, okay then, I'm not a defender myself... however my understanding is that, when a decent number of these raids only requre the movement of 1-2 nations to displace the WA Delegate, it's going to be very difficult to track.

If there is prior knowledge of such an attack being imminent, yeah sure, it's reasonable to expect that a plan can be made in order to protect those Delegates. However, a surprise attack would be only be spotted mid-update, and without prior planning (and especially given only a small minority of these raids would actually need to be successful to remove a proposal from queue) I suspect it really wouldn't be that difficult to pull off.
ShrewLlamaLand
Confederation of Corrupt Dictators | Commission to the World Assembly

"The flag once raised will never fall!"

User avatar
Lord Dominator
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8900
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Right-wing Utopia

Postby Lord Dominator » Mon Apr 13, 2020 5:10 pm

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:
Lord Dominator wrote:K

It's entirely possible for raiders, or any large region for that matter, to simply create a bunch of regions each with 2 WA Members to mass approve a proposal and get it to quorum. To my knowledge this has never actually been an issue because, while not impossible, it's definitely impractical to do so.

It's been done before, it just isn't at all common because regular campaigning works in nearly all cases.
Now that this Delegate bumping method has been openly used against my proposal, I guarantee large regions are going to start taking advantage of it to knock proposals out of the queue that they strongly disapprove of.

Don't give yourself so much credit, this has been around for years (on infrequent use, because the skillet doesn't usually coordinate with people who care about many WA things). I've personally run several bump runs last year at minimum.
Lord Dominator wrote:Libcord I assume, I am not clear on precisely how defenders watch for raiding activity (not bring a defender), just that they do and are very good at it.

Hmmm, okay then, I'm not a defender myself... however my understanding is that, when a decent number of these raids only requre the movement of 1-2 nations to displace the WA Delegate, it's going to be very difficult to track.

Fairly easy to track, relative to difficulty in hiding it, especially once defenders find you the first time.
If there is prior knowledge of such an attack being imminent, yeah sure, it's reasonable to expect that a plan can be made in order to protect those Delegates. However, a surprise attack would be only be spotted mid-update, and without prior planning (and especially given only a small minority of these raids would actually need to be successful to remove a proposal from queue) I suspect it really wouldn't be that difficult to pull off.

I can assure you, defenders don't need much of any pre-warning to defend against raids (and none that is avoidable), and certainly don't need to know raid targets (for the most part) until seconds after the raid attempt starts to competently defend regions.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Technical

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Caffeinated, Cekan, Littlelund, Majestic-12 [Bot], The Terren Dominion, Tramontanum

Advertisement

Remove ads