SB 28-23: Increasing Requirements Act (Passed)

[YE]

First off, my administration comment was in response to Sestak feeling 45 days old to be valid was too long rather than 30.

My original intent with the account age validity requirement was to stop a situation of someone running for president and deciding to get desperate and bring people in from offsite just so that they somewhat selfishly be elected. Considering most people who create accounts rarely post on Atlas immediately (I myself did not for 10 months), I don't see how this closes the game much. I guess I could see the argument this deters self-recruits as well but those are historically fairly rare and aren't worth the risk of the game eventually turning into an off site recruiting arms race and honestly if anything the 40 post provision discourages that more (which even then is lower than the 50 from 2010 and worth noting than outside of the suspected YT offsiters, almost none of the recent recruits have fewer than that many posts).

As for why account age is tied to validity, there are two reasons. First, so this can be achieved without a constitutional amendment. Second, I don't have an issue with people taking office with a relatively new account as the people interested in such are much less likely to be brought in from off-site (though the 40 post requirement admittedly makes that somewhat more difficult).

[YE]

First off, my administration comment was in response to Sestak feeling 45 days old to be valid was too long rather than 30.

My original intent with the account age validity requirement was to stop a situation of someone running for president and deciding to get desperate and bring people in from offsite just so that they somewhat selfishly be elected. Considering most people who create accounts rarely post on Atlas immediately (I myself did not for 10 months), I don't see how this closes the game much. I guess I could see the argument this deters self-recruits as well but those are historically fairly rare and aren't worth the risk of the game eventually turning into an off site recruiting arms race and honestly if anything the 40 post provision discourages that more (which even then is lower than the 50 from 2010 and worth noting than outside of the suspected YT offsiters, almost none of the recent recruits have fewer than that many posts).

As for why account age is tied to validity, there are two reasons. First, so this can be achieved without a constitutional amendment. Second, I don't have an issue with people taking office with a relatively new account as the people interested in such are much less likely to be brought in from off-site (though the 40 post requirement admittedly makes that somewhat more difficult).

So now you want to ban it out of a selfish desire to not let Labor ever lose. 

That same situation could easily apply to Labor at some point down the road. I should elaborate that I’m not a fan of using recruiting as a tool to elect solely one person or solely for one election, which to the extent that this will make a difference, is more likely to happen with users of such low post count on the electorate regardless on whether they were brought in offsite.

[YE]

First off, my administration comment was in response to Sestak feeling 45 days old to be valid was too long rather than 30.

My original intent with the account age validity requirement was to stop a situation of someone running for president and deciding to get desperate and bring people in from offsite just so that they somewhat selfishly be elected. Considering most people who create accounts rarely post on Atlas immediately (I myself did not for 10 months), I don't see how this closes the game much. I guess I could see the argument this deters self-recruits as well but those are historically fairly rare and aren't worth the risk of the game eventually turning into an off site recruiting arms race and honestly if anything the 40 post provision discourages that more (which even then is lower than the 50 from 2010 and worth noting than outside of the suspected YT offsiters, almost none of the recent recruits have fewer than that many posts).

As for why account age is tied to validity, there are two reasons. First, so this can be achieved without a constitutional amendment. Second, I don't have an issue with people taking office with a relatively new account as the people interested in such are much less likely to be brought in from off-site (though the 40 post requirement admittedly makes that somewhat more difficult).

So now you want to ban it out of a selfish desire to not let Labor ever lose.  Just admit to me that YT hurt your feelings too much as a glorified Labor zombie that doesn't hold office.

It isn't a good premise to make policy that affects the game long term when you're scared. Lots of bad judgement from those I see here!

WHINE WHINE WHINE.

Dude I’m a Fremont MP and I was from before YT even re-registered.

[YE]

^that case had to do with a regional law so that statement by IKV seems poorly worded unless I’m missing something.

[YE]

some level of persuasion is still necessary to win elections.

When was the last time before this election which persuasion was needed to win elections, the only example in my head was last August, and before that was probably June 2019. There are only like 5 swing voters in the game, and with a game with over 200 voters, their votes don't amount for much.

Edit: Zombie voting also has an impact on reducing the impact persuasion, and unless we have a commission to purge zombies, persuasion will be more useless as time goes on.

You really want that HAEV?

At the very least a commission to remove discord zombies from all parties ideally.

How will all parties on the commission even know who is and isn’t a Discord voter considering many Discord Atlas servers are basically invite only cliques?

[YE]

some level of persuasion is still necessary to win elections.

When was the last time before this election which persuasion was needed to win elections, the only example in my head was last August, and before that was probably June 2019. There are only like 5 swing voters in the game, and with a game with over 200 voters, their votes don't amount for much.

Edit: Zombie voting also has an impact on reducing the impact persuasion, and unless we have a commission to purge zombies, persuasion will be more useless as time goes on.

You really want that HAEV?

At the very least a commission to remove discord zombies from all parties ideally.

How will all parties on the commission even know who is and isn’t a Discord voter considering many Discord Atlas servers are basically invite only cliques?

I guess by people who look like they do enough posts to get valid on a single day.

Not all Discord voters validity post or even come close to needing to do so.

Not all validity posters come from Discord.