SB World Assembly voting policy?

[Sandaoguo]

How does Southern Bellz intend on casting their 244+ votes in the World Assembly? Will there be a forum vote? Will it be based on the in-game vote?

[Southern Bellz]

I will do whatever the majority opinion is in this thread.

[Sandaoguo]

In that case, I think you should vote on the last day based upon the in-game tally. The only time I think you should vote differently is for extraordinary reasons, in consultation with the Assembly. A thread could still be posted, either by yourself or anybody interested in speaking on the resolution. It could even be the responsibility of the MoRA, if they want it.

 

Caveat: This is only for General Assembly resolutions. I have no problem with using the same policy for Security Council resolutions, but I recognize that the Security Council has more of an impact on regional security and inter-regional politics than the General Assembly.

[Belschaft]

Sell them to the highest bidder. I'm sure that will be Gatesville now that Uni is gone, which may be awkward for us.

[Sandaoguo]

Sell them to the highest bidder. I'm sure that will be Gatesville now that Uni is gone, which may be awkward for us.

 

I'll double whatever Unibot gave you

[HEM]

I think it would be better to have a forum vote / RMB discussion a few days before something is slated to come to a vote. By voting early we influence the voting more.

[Sandaoguo]

I think it would be better to have a forum vote / RMB discussion a few days before something is slated to come to a vote. By voting early we influence the voting more.

 

The problem I have is that "influencing the vote" is kind of undemocratic. It's bad enough that delegates, especially GCR delegates, have outsized influence for really no good reason. But by voting early, they can sway the vote of undecideds, without actually persuading them through dialogue. It boils down to whether or not The Coalition wants to exert as much influence as it can, or to work towards making the World Assembly a much more democratic body. Because GA resolutions don't affect The Coalition's power, it seems wrong to vote early. With SC resolutions, I can understand voting early on resolutions that affect our security or political strategy.

 

The main issue I have with voting via forums is that it can be gamed so easily. While forum voting doesn't really reflect the will of the region at large, if we have to do forum voting, it would be best to limit eligibility to those with a WA nation in the region, except if they have to have their WA outside the region as part of military operations or other official duties. We don't want a system that can be gamed easily. For instance, Douria first joined Osiris to influence the WA vote, because their citizenship laws and voting laws were really lax.

[TAO]

"[I]nfluencing the vote" is kind of undemocratic?  I totally disagree; it is called "Leadership."  TSP is a Feeder with a giant presence in the WA.  How can our 'vote' be, in any way, undemocratic?  If SB votes, TSP is democratic.  If SB's vote (without accompanying rhetoric) happens to persuade someone/anyone to vote either alongside or against the vote cast by SB, the TSP vote (as cast by SB) IS democratic. INFLUENCE (the 'persuasion' kind and not the Game thingy) and LEADERSHIP go hand in hand.  Don't limit SB and/or TSP.

[Loh]

TAO is right. Influencing the vote in this case is seen as a sign of influence through democracy.

[Sandaoguo]

"nfluencing the vote" is kind of undemocratic?  I totally disagree; it is called "Leadership."  TSP is a Feeder with a giant presence in the WA.  How can our 'vote' be, in any way, undemocratic?  If SB votes, TSP is democratic.  If SB's vote (without accompanying rhetoric) happens to persuade someone/anyone to vote either alongside or against the vote cast by SB, the TSP vote (as cast by SB) IS democratic. INFLUENCE (the 'persuasion' kind and not the Game thingy) and LEADERSHIP go hand in hand.  Don't limit SB and/or TSP.

 

The World Assembly is undemocratic for the simple fact that it doesn't follow the "one man, one vote" principle. Voting early and allowing things like voting in multiple regional forums is abusing the undemocratic nature of the World Assembly by improperly influencing the vote with hundreds of extra votes that weren't earned through hard work. WA authors can spend months on writing on a proposal, and all [i]that work deserves to be treated with respect.

 

Delegates of GCRs should recognize that the WA is its own community and own game within NationStates. TSP doesn't earn prestige or power by influencing the vote, because TSP doesn't have any stake in that part of the game. What you ought to realize is that the World Assembly is the only part of NationStates where success is dependent upon the choices made by people who don't participate.

 

I don't really think a legislative solution is necessary here, because TSP hasn't been taken advantage of yet, and we don't see anybody trying to do so. People thinking of running for delegate next month should probably think on this, though. Unless TSP just doesn't vote, the 240-ish votes are going to have influence no matter what. My opinion, rooted in my participation in the WA, is that the delegate's policy should be to <i>decrease</i> the amount of influence, so that resolutions get as close to an up-or-down vote as possible in an inherently undemocratic system.