DeletedUser3741
That isnt really a fair value, 2 hours of work will usually result in around 30-50$, so it should be reduced to
Code:
(money contributed)+20X(building hours)
That isnt really a fair value, 2 hours of work will usually result in around 30-50$, so it should be reduced to
DeletedUser
DeletedUser
You are of course absolutely correct, and your idea will be implemented imediately, thank you
DeletedUser
You are of course absolutely correct, and your idea will be implemented imediately, thank you
What are you guys talking about?
DeletedUser3741
Dark Assa, what you are currently doing is called trolling and generally frowned upon
If you do not contribute directly to the topic at hand, then do not post at all.
If you want to know what the topic is about I suggest you read every post first then only post if you have a reply that will relate to the topic at hand
I suggest you watch this instructional video - http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting
If you do not contribute directly to the topic at hand, then do not post at all.
If you want to know what the topic is about I suggest you read every post first then only post if you have a reply that will relate to the topic at hand
I suggest you watch this instructional video - http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting
DeletedUser
we are talking about weighted votes, and how much the proportion should be, 50 times was too much, 20 times is much fairer
DeletedUser
Yep. I could have said 'could' and purposely said 'should'. I wasn't hostile at all. Mad Hank posted on the boards his suggestion. I assumed he wanted feedback no matter what the feedback was. I gave my opinion on it point by point.
If the weighted votes can be overruled by the Mayor then what is the point of them? Seems to me as if you are asking citizens to donate more to get a weightier vote and then taking the right they paid for away from them.
You are of course absolutely correct, and your idea will be implemented imediately, thank you
Why is my reasoning that weighted votes are bought votes crap, and this other guys reasoning that the formula isn't fair valid? Oh, because you think I was attacking your policies. Not agreeing word for word with your policies does not make me hostile to your intentions.
Also, if your town is a democracy where everyone is voting on the rules and policies then why post it here first. Post it on your town forum and get your citizens opinions on it first before unleashing it on the world.
DeletedUser
Poor choice of words, definitely. I apologize to everyone that started thinking that I want to enforce server-wide rules.
Lone Ranger, nobody says that you have to accept these documents I just thought that towns that accept them... will probably have more people coming in, don't you think?
Lamorra, no town mayor can be forced to have these implemented, as I stated in the very beginning. And all that want these implemented can modify them. So yes, it's a template. But if it's altered, anyone getting an invitation from the town still has the right to read the modified version of the Bill and the Constitution before joining
Whistlingleaf, I have nothing against the ways towns are run. And I am a mayor of the town Lincoln, that does follow these documents. But I never stated that all towns must follow them. These documents are a template.
Idaian... If you plan on taking the Bill of Rights into your town unmodified, you have to understand what it is about. It's about trust. The person you are accepting into the town has to be able to trust you without fear of getting booted. You have to trust the person you are inviting into the town, and you can do that by looking at their application. And of course, you can always drop the Second Right from your town's policies.
Denisero, I don't see how these documents might usurp the power to me. I am missing your point. According to these documents, anyone outside my town has NOTHING to do with me...
And what rights are you really talking about here? The right to be informed and the right not to be kicked out without due cause. That is just common sense.
You would be amazed on what town mayors do...
Weighted votes? Too easy to manipulate that system. That would be BUYING votes
That was exactly my point here. People that contribute most to the town development have more power over deciding where the town goes. It's not buying votes, it's being part of the government by helping the government. And besides, it's only one half of voting.
Sometimes there may be events happening that require quick action on the part of the town counselors. In these cases, when delay could be harmful to a town, then the town counselors should have every right to adopt a temporary rule until further discussion and ideas can be voted on.
Can you give me an example of that, except a non-skilled builder trying to build, which I discussed already
Again, it should be up to the founder how they want their town government to run. Even if you do the voting thing, in a town with 5 citizens a tie can take place very easily of 2-2. So someone has to be the tiebreaker. That right should always be reserved to the town founder. Someone has to lead, they just don't have to put a noose around every citizens neck to do so.
I believe I did say that the Town Mayor is the final tie-breaker
Lone Ranger, nobody says that you have to accept these documents
I just thought that towns that accept them... will probably have more people coming in, don't you think?Lamorra, no town mayor can be forced to have these implemented, as I stated in the very beginning. And all that want these implemented can modify them. So yes, it's a template. But if it's altered, anyone getting an invitation from the town still has the right to read the modified version of the Bill and the Constitution before joining
Whistlingleaf, I have nothing against the ways towns are run. And I am a mayor of the town Lincoln, that does follow these documents. But I never stated that all towns must follow them. These documents are a template.
Idaian... If you plan on taking the Bill of Rights into your town unmodified, you have to understand what it is about. It's about trust. The person you are accepting into the town has to be able to trust you without fear of getting booted. You have to trust the person you are inviting into the town, and you can do that by looking at their application. And of course, you can always drop the Second Right from your town's policies.
Denisero, I don't see how these documents might usurp the power to me. I am missing your point. According to these documents, anyone outside my town has NOTHING to do with me...
And what rights are you really talking about here? The right to be informed and the right not to be kicked out without due cause. That is just common sense.
You would be amazed on what town mayors do...
Weighted votes? Too easy to manipulate that system. That would be BUYING votes
That was exactly my point here. People that contribute most to the town development have more power over deciding where the town goes. It's not buying votes, it's being part of the government by helping the government. And besides, it's only one half of voting.
Sometimes there may be events happening that require quick action on the part of the town counselors. In these cases, when delay could be harmful to a town, then the town counselors should have every right to adopt a temporary rule until further discussion and ideas can be voted on.
Can you give me an example of that, except a non-skilled builder trying to build, which I discussed already
Again, it should be up to the founder how they want their town government to run. Even if you do the voting thing, in a town with 5 citizens a tie can take place very easily of 2-2. So someone has to be the tiebreaker. That right should always be reserved to the town founder. Someone has to lead, they just don't have to put a noose around every citizens neck to do so.
I believe I did say that the Town Mayor is the final tie-breaker
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
I was reading it but when you post the codes, I lost my mind for a bit. So I didn't know what you guys are talking about.
Sorry...
Oh, ok...thanks Rose.
DeletedUser
Thanks for clearing that up, nice one for providing the community a resource that you could just as easily have kept to yourself, as many towns do.
DeletedUser
Well you have the non-skilled builder example. Also, maybe you have a dueler that is using your town as a base to conduct a personal vendetta. Maybe he was kicked out of a previous town and he is harassing all the members of his old town by non-stop dueling them. Maybe this town is getting upset about it and wants to declare war on your town unless your vengeful dueler is kicked out of town. You would have to decide what action to take and how immediately. You would have to weigh the rights of the citizen that got you into that mess, without your consent or knowledge, versus the good of your town.
Or maybe you are in a war with another town and one of your citizens is a planted spy giving away information to your enemies. In that case you may not want to make public the situation and take immediate action and boot that citizen from your town.
I'm sure there are other examples but those 2 seem valid to me.
Mad Hank, I actually like most of your ideas. I am just playing devils advocate a bit. Its what I do.
Or maybe you are in a war with another town and one of your citizens is a planted spy giving away information to your enemies. In that case you may not want to make public the situation and take immediate action and boot that citizen from your town.
I'm sure there are other examples but those 2 seem valid to me.
Mad Hank, I actually like most of your ideas. I am just playing devils advocate a bit. Its what I do.
DeletedUser
As I pointed out, the Mayor has absolute veto, that is built into the game, there is nothing anyone can do about that. You made a specific point that weighted votes could be seen to be misused. SO therefore if it LOOKS that way, the mayor does indeed have the power to weigh up the popular vote and the weighted vote and make a fair decision .. therefore many popular votes can not be over ruled by a few weightier votes, if it is seen to be obvious that fair play is not taking place.
I never said that your reasoning was crap, I explained that there was a process to ensure that would not happen in extreme and obvious cases. Talamere made a valid point that we had not explored fully (50X was just a quick example) and we agree that his calculations are better than ours.
I think your choice of words can make you sound hostile ..>> "Oh, because you think I was attacking your policies." << like this for example. That is very personal.
If you had simply said
"Why is my reasoning that weighted votes are bought votes crap, and this other guys reasoning that the formula isn't fair valid? Not agreeing word for word with your policies does not make me hostile to your intentions."
That would have been sufficient to get your point across. And I would agree with that statement.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
This was definitely an interesting read; too hard to be implemented, but they're good guidelines that towns may wish to follow in the future.
Few things I'd like to touch on:
1. The place of Popular Votes and Weighted Votes with Town Mayors, and of course, the Third Right.
- If a member does not agree with the chosen proposal a town mayor decided, they may call upon the third right and refuse to participate in the outcome. Should this be left alone, changed, or infracted upon?
- If the majority of members decide to go with the opposite proposal instead of what the town mayor decides, this is left alone because of the preamble, changed, or infracted upon?
2. Town Forum and the First Right.
- If a vote calls to clear the town forum, specifically the voting section, for whatever reason, this will be decided how? Ignored, or implemented? And if stated in the town's policies, would it be overruled?
3. A suggestion on Weighted Votes.
- Perhaps it would be better to use a 1:1(or 2:2, 3:3, etc) ratio, and stacked voting. Each member gains 1 extra vote per $100 contributed, and 1 extra vote per 1 hour of work contributed. Therefore, a member that has contributed $500, gets 6 votes, while a member that has contributed 5 hours of work, also gets 6 votes. This is, of course, if you decide to even give a single vote to a member that has contributed nothing as a default, if not a decimal for under an hour of work or under $100 deposited.
(I lost my train of thought from too many distractions; I apologize if I didn't word anything too well or missed any previous statements).
Few things I'd like to touch on:
1. The place of Popular Votes and Weighted Votes with Town Mayors, and of course, the Third Right.
- If a member does not agree with the chosen proposal a town mayor decided, they may call upon the third right and refuse to participate in the outcome. Should this be left alone, changed, or infracted upon?
- If the majority of members decide to go with the opposite proposal instead of what the town mayor decides, this is left alone because of the preamble, changed, or infracted upon?
2. Town Forum and the First Right.
- If a vote calls to clear the town forum, specifically the voting section, for whatever reason, this will be decided how? Ignored, or implemented? And if stated in the town's policies, would it be overruled?
3. A suggestion on Weighted Votes.
- Perhaps it would be better to use a 1:1(or 2:2, 3:3, etc) ratio, and stacked voting. Each member gains 1 extra vote per $100 contributed, and 1 extra vote per 1 hour of work contributed. Therefore, a member that has contributed $500, gets 6 votes, while a member that has contributed 5 hours of work, also gets 6 votes. This is, of course, if you decide to even give a single vote to a member that has contributed nothing as a default, if not a decimal for under an hour of work or under $100 deposited.
(I lost my train of thought from too many distractions; I apologize if I didn't word anything too well or missed any previous statements).
DeletedUser
Denisero, no-one can stop you from booting anyone from your town
Unlike the real Bill of Rights and the real Constitution, these are not carved into stone. If you can explain the circumstances to the other town members, it will of course have no consequences. But if they feel like what you did is not justified, they will stop trusting you and that will create a very bad atmosphere in the town.DeletedUser
oops sorry missed this one
It is on place in our Town Forum, our citizens are keen to implement it, we thought other towns might enjoy the fun of writing their own Bill of Rights .. we did not unleash anything on the world
DeletedUser
If a citizen decides not to contribute, that is his/her absolute right. Based on the inactivity level, the Mayor may want to bring up the thread to vote the person out of the town
Majority of the members working on their own thing would not make sense mathematically... because if they all feel so strongly about that thing they would all vote for it. And if they all work on different things and do not listen to anything... they are only hurting themselves....
Citizens voting to clear a town forum? If they want to... sure.... Once again, the Constitution is not all carved out in stone. The Constitution must
be followed not only by the word, but by the spirit
And Talamare has already proposed the best formula for calculating the weighted votes
DeletedUser
Mad Hank, I did not take anything personal. I may have come off a bit strong, but my intention wasn't to bash you. Matter of fact, there are plenty of good ideas in there. Sorry if it came off that way.
I don't mind that you posted that stuff at all.
I don't mind that you posted that stuff at all.
DeletedUser
Don't like how a town is run? vote with your feet and found a town of your own!
DeletedUser
Ah... Thank you. I wanted to smack the back of his head.
Although, I wonder he watched it.
DeletedUser
Is this deja vu? I think I already stated that I am a town mayor currently. And no, I don't like how most towns are run, else I wouldn't be trying to push more liberty in them.