 |
|  |
 |
|
mtgillespie
|
|
Manchester, England
Oct 2001 time: 05:21
|
|
There has been some discussion about the use of the abstain option in polls, where it is valid and what it actually means. I posted this in another thread, although it probably wasnt appropriate. I'm not going to go into what abstain currently means, but i think if we have it defined, it could be a useful tool.
quote: At the moment, either abstain votes will count either as a no, or will not affect the vote at all (I believe there will be debate on this, as it is not specified one way or the other). In either case, what are they there for?
I've been thinking about this for a little while, and wonder if we should have an amendment, whereby a certain percentage of abstain votes allows/requires a re-poll, with a modified proposal, but no three week waiting period is required. This allows for ammendments which are correct in theory but badly worded/unclear or have a small part which needs to be removed, without having to wait before being changed. It also means that and abstain vote has a significant effect, without being a yes or no, and can be used if people feel a poll has been posted without sufficient debate.
|
Do we need this, or should we get rid of the abstain option altogether? Comments please 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
disorganizer
|
|
Bavaria (Fanatika)
Jun 2002 time: 05:21
|
|
It showed that the abstain will be a valuable means of determining the participation rates. By leaving it out, we can never tell why ppl did not vote. They could be not voting because they did not care for the result or for any other reason.
An example:
A poll without abstain has only 10 votes. What could this mean?
a) the poll did not reach enough ppl to be representative (maybe it ran too short? forum outage etc?)
b) citizens dont care about the result.
or
c) not enough citizens participating
in case a), the result would maybe not be the will of citizenry.
if we would have the abstain option, we could tell how many ppl really participated in the poll.
speaking for the embassy:
in phoenatica, we implemented a "quorum rule", which forces a poll to have a minimum participation to be binding for the government. this prevents us from basing our decisions on "false" poll-results. we learned from a decission being taken by a minority poll in the early game, which after the proposed step was taken showed to be not the way our citizens thought.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mtgillespie
|
|
Manchester, England
Oct 2001 time: 05:21
|
|
quote: Originally posted by civman2000
abstain=no. However, in all polls except ones that need 2/3 to pass (ie amendments and impeachment) it doesn't matter because unless it's a drastic action (declaring war or similar things) the option with the most votes will simply win. The reason the economy poll currently in question does not pass is because yes does not have 2/3 of the votes, which is very clearly the requirement. |
I'm not arguing here what it means at the moment, that is for another place. However, whether it means no or not, it is not a useful option at the moment. It either means no, which already has an option, or it means nothing, because it will be discounted. What i am asking is, should we make it useful, or remove it. I see no reason for having it at the moment, whichever way the argument falls.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mtgillespie
|
|
Manchester, England
Oct 2001 time: 05:21
|
|
That's my point. if you want another option, or the poll is done badly, or you agree with the spirit or not the wording, there is no way to vote no without making the poller wait three weeks to correct it, at least if we follow the letter of the law. This would help in those cases. It would give a different meaning and effect to no, which IMHO is more useful.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
disorganizer
|
|
Bavaria (Fanatika)
Jun 2002 time: 05:21
|
|
aro: you could base minimum numbers on the census or presidential elections.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
disorganizer
|
|
Bavaria (Fanatika)
Jun 2002 time: 05:21
|
|
epi:
* abstain is someone still being here and recognizing the poll, but: a) not caring about the result b) protesting about the poll itself
* not voting is the above or someone who a) didnt realize the poll at all b) is not here at the moment c) left the game
it is the same with not going to elections and giving invalid votes in real life.
if more ppl would give invalid votes in rl-elections if they find noone to vote for and are dissatisfied with all parties and candidates, this would be noticed by someone (hopefully).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
disorganizer
|
|
Bavaria (Fanatika)
Jun 2002 time: 05:21
|
|
captain: i must admit, i did this with the "census yes/no" poll. i just wanted to save me a click. and i didnt want to state my opinion as im no apolytonian.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
kring
|
 |
Wichita,KS,USA
Dec 2001 time: 23:21
|
|
Abstain lets people know that people are voting; and as mentioned, if enough abstains are voted, then the poll would not pass, as abstain is neither a yes or a no vote. Abstain frequently is a sign of voters not liking the choices available, but still getting to voice an opinion. Removing it, and leaving only yes/no will result in fewer voters. It can send a message, esp. if a large enough group vote that way; when that happens, hopefully, they will post why they voted that way.
I don't have a problem with Captain's suggestion about the abstain being changed to this poll is invalid, or similar language. In some elections, you have none of the above as an option. Several elections back, none of the above got several thousand votes IRL, not enough to win the election, but enough to tell the parties we don't like either one of your candidates.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21. Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|