Friday, April 30, 2010

Proposal: Principled Self-Interest

Times out 11-5. -Ornithopter

Adminned at 02 May 2010 10:55:13 UTC

Add a new rule to the ruleset, entitled Parties:

A group of Voters may collaborate to form a political party.

In order to form a Party, a Voter must make a post detailing the name of the party and the names of the specific Voters they would like to invite to it. Those Voters named in the post may indicate their agreement to form the Party in the comments to that post. Once all named Voters have indicated their agreement in this manner, the Party is formed and all of the named Voters, plus the Voter who initiated the original post, are affliated with it.

Each Voter’s party affiliation is tracked in the GNDT under “Affiliation”. Each voter may be affliated with no more than 1 Party. A Voter may voluntarily cease to be affiliated to a party, by blanking their GNDT value for “Affiliation”, at any time.

If a Voter wishes to join an existing Party then they may make a post to that effect. Such a post must have the phrase “Petitioning for Membership:” and the name of the Party they wish to join in the title. If a quorum of the Voters affliated with that Party indicate assent in the comments to that post then the petitioning Voter becomes affliated with that Party.

Add the following to rule 2.1, between the first and second paragraphs:

If a Voter if affiliated with a Party, then all ballots for that Voter are considered to be ballots for the Party to which they are affiliated.

In rule 2.1, change the third bullet point so that it reads as follows:

* if the option selected by the most non-blank Ballots is the name of a Voter (rather than “Spoil” or “Meta”) who is not affiliated with a Party, and no Party has more ballots than that Voter, then that Voter may (at any subsequent time this dynasty) achieve victory;

Add the following bullet point to the between the third and fourth bullet points of rule 2.1:

* if the option selected by the most non-blank ballots is the name of a Voter, or Voters, who are affiliated with the same Party, then that Party may allocate one Voter from their number to have achieved victory according to their own internal procedures;

Add the following to the end of rule 2.6:

Each Party may also create a manifesto, detailing their internal procedure for determining a leader and what themes they would run if successful.

Create a new column in the GNDT entitled “Affiliation”.



30-04-2010 10:47:02 UTC

for  for  for

Kevan: City he/him

30-04-2010 11:06:52 UTC

for Needs an explicit mechanic for “creating a manifesto”, though - can anyone from the Party create and edit it? I suppose the literal interpretation for now would be “every member must edit it together” (requiring all Party members to publicly approve the latest wiki version of a manifesto before it’s binding, which I guess is easy enough).


30-04-2010 11:11:15 UTC



30-04-2010 12:14:01 UTC

for Wondering if the party leader is the one who can make a DoV or if they are simply “in charge” Also does the leader have any other roles or power?

Josh: he/they

30-04-2010 12:39:37 UTC

Galdyn - there isn’t a “party leader” role at the moment. The person who initiates the party proposal just becomes a regular party member when it passes.

I’d be open to an expended leader role but haven’t thought about how to implement it.


30-04-2010 12:40:24 UTC

Josh- you mention “leader” in the last section and so I was wondering specifically what you meant by that.

Josh: he/they

30-04-2010 12:48:13 UTC

Ah, sorry, quite right - in that context I meant the person who would achieve victory in the event that the Party won the election. Admittedly the wording is unclear.


30-04-2010 13:34:56 UTC

Nice idea, for

[Kevan] Currently there wouldn‘t be a way to edit a Party manifesto… The last paragraph needs some fixing.

Kevan: City he/him

30-04-2010 13:43:40 UTC

[Keba] I think “Each Party may also create a manifesto” could be reasonably interpreted as “If the entire Party sit down and work together, they can create a manifesto”. A Party is defined as “a group of Voters”, after all.


30-04-2010 13:59:21 UTC



30-04-2010 15:23:02 UTC



30-04-2010 17:57:18 UTC


redtara: they/them

30-04-2010 19:19:48 UTC


redtara: they/them

30-04-2010 20:04:30 UTC

Justification: Who selects the “internal processes”? And can the party have its own rules?


30-04-2010 20:16:27 UTC

against All this does is remove possible candidates and maybe take away the option of one of the better dynasty ideas because a party chooses a different leader, and it sure won’t get any more votes for anyone.

This is dumb, why so many for’s?


30-04-2010 21:10:23 UTC

Hmm… for
This is a party politics dynasty, after all.


30-04-2010 23:21:15 UTC

This needs to have some way to work with the proposed rule “leaders debate” Because that asks for the leading voters to participate in the debate. Yet what if parties are leading, according to the rules it would still be the individual voters who are participating.

Darknight: he/him

01-05-2010 05:24:37 UTC



01-05-2010 15:18:54 UTC



01-05-2010 18:49:24 UTC



02-05-2010 03:30:24 UTC



02-05-2010 11:27:28 UTC

[Kevan]. I know, they could create a Manifesto, but they could not edit it. ;)

Kevan: City he/him

02-05-2010 14:13:13 UTC

[Keba] They could edit it in the same way, they’d just have to confirm (perhaps with multiple wiki signatures) that they all approve of each edit.