06-20-2011, 02:17 PM
I posted something similar to this long ago, but I've updated it (as opinions and situations change over time!). I figured it might be relevant to post this here.
What would elections accomplish? Well there are a few points that should not be overlooked:[*
id8ml6x]Elections give us security. They define the time frames of voting, and we can be prepared for it rather than someone suddenly having a statement of intent who is legit. They put elections on our time frames, on our terms, and by our people. I don't know about everyone here, but I'd like to know that we'll have elections in February and not in some hodgepodge date where someone kind of just comes along and bam, we're having elections.
.
[*id8ml6x]We can set the endocap much better. Now we don't have to wait for someone to choose whether or not to run to get them down below the cap - they stay down, even during elections. If they win, fine, we'll get him or her in office, but basically, this adds to the security of elections.
.
[*id8ml6x] Elections make office holders do their work better. In the back of the delegate's mind, whoever it is or shall be, they'll know in six months they'll either not run or have to run against someone again. This way, they and other office holders will be more inclined to either accomplish what they want to do in six months or continue to do a good job with the hopes of being elected. And, as I tell people in TEP: if you do a good job, and want to be re-elected, the prospect of elections as an incumbent shouldn't faze you.
.
[*id8ml6x]Elections prevent the 'I don't want to run because I'm afraid of hurting their feelings' thing. I admit I've done that before. We shouldn't be afraid of that here. We're all adults (I believe) who know each other by varying lengths and should feel we can disagree with one another or want changes knowing others won't take it personally. Yeah, that doesn't always happen, but our current system says 'I am challenging you'. People don't like those personal challenges. Elections say 'Well, it's election time again, I think I have a few good ideas. I'll run'. In short, elections can impersonalize transitions a bit.
.
[*id8ml6x]They allow the forum people to vote, and take away the worry of some group coming in and changing things around. Let's be honest here, folks. We're a region of over 2,000 nations. What government are we trying to uphold? The forum government, right? That government that about two dozen or so are a part of? Therefore, doesn't it make the most sense for those who are involved in our forums, essentially where our region's heart is (offsite as it may be), choose the candidate? You know, hold <em class='bbc'>forum</em> elections for our <em class='bbc'>forum</em> government? Many NSers can tell you endorsements =/= support. Some people don't endorse just because their nation is a communist one and the delegate is not a communist nation (seen it before, trust me on this one).
.
[*id8ml6x]We can choose. These elections would allow for a <em class='bbc'>choice</em>, that is, if we the people don't happen to like the way candidate A's platform looks, we can refute it and vote for candidate B. The system of the past has, for the past 3-4 years, had the delegacy passed down from person to person (with the exception of Topid and the elections we just had). The level of involvement there has been two people: the guy coming in, and the guy going out. I would like to change this. Power to the peeps, in other words. I'm not condemning the actions of the past, but I am firm on the forward motion here.
.
[*id8ml6x]We can sniff out people who want to run just for the heck of it versus those who want to run to get their hands dirty and bring forth their efforts. Any citizen can run. But it is us who decide if they're ready or not, with our votes. Voters here have a few tactics up their sleeve. They can ask the tough questions and see where a candidate really stands. How well do they know our region? What are their motives? And from that, voters make a decision. Why would someone vote for another person who doesn't know the region and/or doesn't have good motives or a good plan? This is where the element of trust in the voter must be establsihed. I trust people in this region to vote for the better candidate. After all, this is a region of the people, not the delegate or the governmental office holders, but all people. It is time to trust the voters.
.
[*id8ml6x]Elections are fun, exciting, and wake people up. NS is like that. If there's a change, or the potential for a change, people flock to it. I'm not saying I'm an expert here, but I've played the game long enough where I can say that's a reality. If you want to wake people up, get them involved. Hold elections. Let them know that hey, that could be you up there one day.
What would elections accomplish? Well there are a few points that should not be overlooked:[*
id8ml6x]Elections give us security. They define the time frames of voting, and we can be prepared for it rather than someone suddenly having a statement of intent who is legit. They put elections on our time frames, on our terms, and by our people. I don't know about everyone here, but I'd like to know that we'll have elections in February and not in some hodgepodge date where someone kind of just comes along and bam, we're having elections. .
[*
id8ml6x]We can set the endocap much better. Now we don't have to wait for someone to choose whether or not to run to get them down below the cap - they stay down, even during elections. If they win, fine, we'll get him or her in office, but basically, this adds to the security of elections. .
[*
id8ml6x] Elections make office holders do their work better. In the back of the delegate's mind, whoever it is or shall be, they'll know in six months they'll either not run or have to run against someone again. This way, they and other office holders will be more inclined to either accomplish what they want to do in six months or continue to do a good job with the hopes of being elected. And, as I tell people in TEP: if you do a good job, and want to be re-elected, the prospect of elections as an incumbent shouldn't faze you..
[*
id8ml6x]Elections prevent the 'I don't want to run because I'm afraid of hurting their feelings' thing. I admit I've done that before. We shouldn't be afraid of that here. We're all adults (I believe) who know each other by varying lengths and should feel we can disagree with one another or want changes knowing others won't take it personally. Yeah, that doesn't always happen, but our current system says 'I am challenging you'. People don't like those personal challenges. Elections say 'Well, it's election time again, I think I have a few good ideas. I'll run'. In short, elections can impersonalize transitions a bit..
[*
id8ml6x]They allow the forum people to vote, and take away the worry of some group coming in and changing things around. Let's be honest here, folks. We're a region of over 2,000 nations. What government are we trying to uphold? The forum government, right? That government that about two dozen or so are a part of? Therefore, doesn't it make the most sense for those who are involved in our forums, essentially where our region's heart is (offsite as it may be), choose the candidate? You know, hold <em class='bbc'>forum</em> elections for our <em class='bbc'>forum</em> government? Many NSers can tell you endorsements =/= support. Some people don't endorse just because their nation is a communist one and the delegate is not a communist nation (seen it before, trust me on this one)..
[*
id8ml6x]We can choose. These elections would allow for a <em class='bbc'>choice</em>, that is, if we the people don't happen to like the way candidate A's platform looks, we can refute it and vote for candidate B. The system of the past has, for the past 3-4 years, had the delegacy passed down from person to person (with the exception of Topid and the elections we just had). The level of involvement there has been two people: the guy coming in, and the guy going out. I would like to change this. Power to the peeps, in other words. I'm not condemning the actions of the past, but I am firm on the forward motion here..
[*
id8ml6x]We can sniff out people who want to run just for the heck of it versus those who want to run to get their hands dirty and bring forth their efforts. Any citizen can run. But it is us who decide if they're ready or not, with our votes. Voters here have a few tactics up their sleeve. They can ask the tough questions and see where a candidate really stands. How well do they know our region? What are their motives? And from that, voters make a decision. Why would someone vote for another person who doesn't know the region and/or doesn't have good motives or a good plan? This is where the element of trust in the voter must be establsihed. I trust people in this region to vote for the better candidate. After all, this is a region of the people, not the delegate or the governmental office holders, but all people. It is time to trust the voters. .
[*
id8ml6x]Elections are fun, exciting, and wake people up. NS is like that. If there's a change, or the potential for a change, people flock to it. I'm not saying I'm an expert here, but I've played the game long enough where I can say that's a reality. If you want to wake people up, get them involved. Hold elections. Let them know that hey, that could be you up there one day.