Thursday, January 31, 2013

Uncredible Voting?

I have an idea for punishing Credibility-saving vote-changing but don’t know if it’ll go over as poorly as previous attempts. I don’t think it’s too harsh. I would appreciate any feedback (on content or phrasing), which is why this isn’t a Proposal.

The majority vote on a Proposal is the voting icon (FOR or AGAINST) that the most EVCs on it include.

If any Honourable Member changes their voting icon to the majority vote on a Proposal that has been pending for at least 24 hours, and doesn’t change their vote back before the Proposal is resolved, then that Honourable Member looses the amount of Credibility they would have lost by not changing their vote and doesn’t gain any.

I know protosals are frowned upon, but this is not one.



31-01-2013 01:44:18 UTC

Is voting for the first time considered to be a change of your vote since it’s changing from none to whatever your vote is. If so then this would seem to hit anyone who votes at all after 24 hours. I’m not sure about this since i’m not sure what counts as a “change of vote”.


31-01-2013 02:01:40 UTC

I would not be in favour of this, though I do think it fits in with the theme.

RaichuKFM: she/her

31-01-2013 02:03:05 UTC

Not really a fan of this, because it just makes the punishment of people not in the majority vote worse, and I didn’t like that mechanic in the first place.


31-01-2013 03:48:08 UTC

I think this has the potential to make things worse, not better, further encouraging the strategy to wait out the vote.  (There is some benefit to starting the vote, but it is risky).