Introducing a Referendum Procedure?

[Belschaft]

So, I've been playing around with the poll options and I believe that there is now a combination that allows for it to be used largely free from foreign interference and with a guarantee of one member, one vote. The combination is;

 

Resident: Nation must be in TSP

Native: Nation must have more influence in TSP than any other region

WA: Nation must be in the WA

Influence: Nation must have influence equaling that obtained by spending 1,000 days in TSP without WA

 

How would people feel about a Charter amendment allowing for a referendum procedure based of that? There would need to be rules regarding how a referendum can be called (prior Assembly vote/petition seems logical) and for the nature and wording of questions, but I believe it could be an interesting form of direct democracy and engage more of the regional community. Combined with the new system for attaching dispatches to the WFE we have the ability to inform and involve those residents who don't participate in the forum in ways previously impossible.

[Punk D]

How would this work for new nations. A nation that is, say, 1 month old and not WA?

[Belschaft]

It would not be able to vote in the poll. A non-WA resident would have to spend just under two years in TSP to be able to vote in it. Whilst this is regrettable, without that then it would be possible to create a brand new nation so as to vote in the referendum, opening it to outside manipulation. With the combination of requirements I highlighted it would be only be possible to do such if you placed WA membership on a puppet in TSP for some time before the poll was put to vote, which most groups won't be willing or able to do - as it reduces their available WA count - and even those who did do such would then be contributing to our WA count and voting power in the WA.

 

The WA requirement is also required as the only way to ensure one member, one vote.

[Arbiter08]

What about the NSA? What if we need our WA for a mission around the same time the polls are opened?

Also, how much influence would be needed right now? Would a person like me, who has been in TSP since late October, not have enough influence to vote?

[Belschaft]

I believe you would have enough influence to vote, yes. The only way to tell for certain would be for Escade to put up a test poll.

 

As for the NSA, assuming that when not on deployment you maintained a WA in TSP then it should meet the requirements. I can see the issue with referendums occurring whilst the NSA is on deployment, but that could be dealt with relatively easily by having NSA members send in their votes to the Chair of the Assembly, who could then add them on to the total from the poll.

 

Further, do remember that the idea is to engage and give a voice to those residents who are not on the forums and do not possess citizenship and the voting rights that come with it.

[Sandaoguo]

What would be the purpose of a referendum? I don't think it would be a very good idea to start passing laws through the NS regional poll feature, considering that the people voting likely wouldn't be well-informed through debate on the forums. It sounds like recreating the failures of the World Assembly.

[Belschaft]

The objective would be to consult the region at large, especially those residents who lack a voice in the Assembly, about general policy and direction. I do not view referendums as being binding, but rather advisory, as a way to gauge their views and opinions on broad issues. It would also serve to engage them in our democratic process, make them feel valued and consulted, and may lead to more residents choosing to take up citizenship.

[Sandaoguo]

I see the value in non-binding referendums on broad issues. The restrictions you mentioned are the ones built into the poll system, right?

[Belschaft]

Correct. There is also a restriction for 'Large Nations', limiting it to nations over one billion population. That one would be counter-productive, but a combination of the other four produces a relatively secure polling method.

[Kris Kringle]

If this is a non binding thing, is it really necessary to put it in the Charter?

[Escade]

I'll test it out but am not in favor of using it as a referendum on assembly votes.  There is a reason a nation can get citizenship and still be new to TSP or not have a WA in the region consistently but still be a citizen as pointed out above. 


In fact, if NS Mods can put in a feature in which the delegate can input nations for a poll (similar to inputting nations for the ban\eject list) then we could have a citizens only poll.


There are a couple of NS changes\features that I think would help us quite a lot and I'd like to get TSP to start campaigning actively for them on the technical areas. 

[Rebel-topia]

I think its a decent idea, if, outside of theory, it works.

 

Escade. If a nation is a citizen, then it gets its say in the assembly. It wouldnt technically need a vote in-game AND in the assembly, especially if the in-game vote is non-binding.

[Belschaft]

I'm not suggesting that it be used as a referendum on Assembly votes; what I'm suggesting is that it be used to find out the opinion of the region at large on broad questions and policy matters.

[Lord Ravenclaw]

Mixed feelings.

 

Not that I'll be able to vote anyway if the requirements for voting are any more selective than "has a nation in TSP". 

[Hileville]

I'm against this.  NSA members will not always be able to have their WA in region.  This would hurt our NSA members when on assignment.  I'm also not a fan of requiring anyone to have a WA nation in region to participate.

[Belschaft]

If we don't require a WA nation then people can multiple times. WA membership is the only way to certify One Member/One Vote on the NS website. As for the NSA issue, that was addressed several posts ago.

[Kris Kringle]

Like I've said, do we really need to have an Assembly discussion on this? The Delegate can already make polls, and every resident has the right to ask for one, including a question on government policies. There is no need to legislate this.

[Escade]

I agree that it doesn't need legislation.  I've made a poll to test it out, I feel like its still a bit exclusive of the regions that participate actively on the RMB but don't have WAs for whatever reason. 


I can see using polls to create awareness or you just posting on the RMB\regional TGs but until some of the issues are ironed out..I don't see why they need to be discussed in the charter. I like fun polls as well since they encourage RMB activity. 

[Belschaft]

The same attitude could be taken about, for example, the NSA; people can already form military groups, why do we need legislation establishing one? The point of legislation is to create a formal process that is followed.

[Kris Kringle]

The Charter sets out duties and obligations. If we are going to have non binding referendums, then there is no need to codify that. That's not to say we shouldn't have them, but I don't see the point in legislating about them.

[Belschaft]

Because there are questions like format of question, wording of options, poll requirements, process to initiate a referendum, etc, that are best addressed by a General Law.

[Escade]

Just making sure we're all working from the same definition:

 

referendum: a general vote by the electorate on a single political question that has been referred to them for a direct decision.

[Cormac]

I'm really not sure how I feel about this. I oppose use of the poll system for law-making or electoral voting. I realize that isn't what we're discussing here, but I wanted to state this for the record in case it comes up.

 

I can kind of see both points of view here in regard to legislating non-binding referendums, and also the point regarding who these poll options might exclude.

[Geomania]

Bel, how much different is your proposal from that of an elected official in RL commissioning an opinion poll? It would seem odd to me that opinion polls would need to be written as law. I'm not necessarily against it because we should certainly be able to take the temperature of the citizenry, but I'm in agreement with Kris on this.

[Ryccia]

It would not be able to vote in the poll. A non-WA resident would have to spend just under two years in TSP to be able to vote in it.Whilst this is regrettable, without that then it would be possible to create a brand new nation so as to vote in the referendum, opening it to outside manipulation. With the combination of requirements I highlighted it would be only be possible to do such if you placed WA membership on a puppet in TSP for some time before the poll was put to vote, which most groups won't be willing or able to do - as it reduces their available WA count - and even those who did do such would then be contributing to our WA count and voting power in the WA.


The WA requirement is also required as the only way to ensure one member, one vote.

Im not okay with that. If a person wants to vote on the poll, then let it be. However we need to make sure its NOT an enemy puppet though.