Northeast Assembly Thread
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 05:30:07 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Northeast Assembly Thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 ... 239
Author Topic: Northeast Assembly Thread  (Read 377501 times)
cinyc
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,721


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #450 on: October 24, 2009, 11:01:52 PM »

Mr. Lt. Governor -

As I stated previously, I ask that you temporarily table the Veto Override Amendment so that we can address amendments dealing with the number of Assembly seats first.  I ask that you bring the Vero Override Amendment to the floor after we vote on the number of Representatives this body should have.

Thank you.
Logged
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,556


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #451 on: October 24, 2009, 11:05:55 PM »

Seats Number Amendment

1. Article V Section vii) of the New Northeast Constitution is amended as follows :
2. The number of Reps to be elected corresponds to the integer of the number [(V/5)+0.5], with V being the number of northeast citizens who actually vote to elect said Reps. The number of Reps shall be comprised between 2 and 10 notwithstanding what precedes.

Sponsor: Rep. AntonioV

The motion is that the Bill be considered.

All of that opinion say "Aye," to the contrary, "No." The Ayes have it.

The sponsor, Representative AntonioV, has the floor.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #452 on: October 25, 2009, 03:43:23 AM »
« Edited: October 25, 2009, 03:45:18 AM by Northeast Representative Antonio V »

Well, I have to indicate that Hamilton and I are co-sponsor of this Amendment. Smiley

Here is the point : The unsteadiness between the number of seats and the number of real voters is a main reason for the current excessive number of reps. Linking it to the number of actual voters would drastically reduce them (for instance, even with 32 voters, we'd still have only 6 reps), but keeping a link between the number of active citizens and the number of their Representatives.


Aye, obviously.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #453 on: October 25, 2009, 09:04:58 AM »

Thanks to both of you for crafting this amendment

Aye Smiley
Logged
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,556


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #454 on: October 25, 2009, 09:25:07 AM »

Thanks to both of you for crafting this amendment

Aye Smiley

We're not holding a vote on this right now, we're debating the Amendment. Smiley
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #455 on: October 25, 2009, 09:32:21 AM »

Thanks to both of you for crafting this amendment

Aye Smiley

We're not holding a vote on this right now, we're debating the Amendment. Smiley

Oh, ok Smiley

I support the amendment for two reasons I'd like to put before you

First of all, we simply don't need so large Assembly.

Second of all, this would make futher elections more competentive and thus revitalize our political life and participation in the process.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #456 on: October 25, 2009, 11:16:08 AM »

Basically, what Antonio said sums it up Smiley
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #457 on: October 25, 2009, 01:06:30 PM »
« Edited: October 25, 2009, 01:16:50 PM by Northeast Representative Antonio V »

Well, no we just need to wait for 48 long hours of so-called "debate"... Proceedings are so boring !

Anyways, the main problem with this is that it's an Amendment, and Amendments need to be voted by the citizens after passing in the Assembly.
Logged
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,556


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #458 on: October 25, 2009, 01:15:42 PM »

Well, no we just need to wait for 48 long hours... Proceedings are so boring !

Well, actually, debate lasts 72 hours:
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course, a Rep. can propose to suspend that section, although I advise a healthy amount of debate before voting on Amendments. Smiley
Logged
cinyc
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,721


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #459 on: October 25, 2009, 02:47:45 PM »

Well, no we just need to wait for 48 long hours... Proceedings are so boring !

Well, actually, debate lasts 72 hours:
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course, a Rep. can propose to suspend that section, although I advise a healthy amount of debate before voting on Amendments. Smiley


We lowered that to 48 hours in Mr. Moderate's amendment to the SOAP>

Here's what I don't understand: why aren't we just fixing the number of Representatives at a number - 5 or 6 - instead of making things variable again?  Isn't it simpler to vote for a known number of seats?
Logged
Smid
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,151
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #460 on: October 25, 2009, 10:46:45 PM »

Here's what I don't understand: why aren't we just fixing the number of Representatives at a number - 5 or 6 - instead of making things variable again?  Isn't it simpler to vote for a known number of seats?

It's simpler to calculate a set number of seats in advance. That said, I've been running the numbers in Excel for this. For the turnout range of V = 24 to V = 500 (so for virtually any turnout we'd expect, except in low-turnout races where fewer than 24 voters cast a ballot), the Quota will always be between five and six votes. I figured this would be the case because although my maths isn't great, we were putting the number of votes in both the numerator and the denominator of the formula to calculate the quota. It is perhaps, therefore simpler to amend this Amendment to read that the quota required to be elected shall be five votes. This will have virtually the same affect (in some races, it may elect an additional candidate because of strange preference flows and a large fraction of a vote left over) but won't change the competitive nature of the election substantially (while maintaining the benefit of simplifying the math involved in calculating the election results). If you're better than me at simplifying equations, the formula looks something like:

Q = (V/(n+1))+1
n = (V/5)+0.5

where: V = Number of Votes cast
            n = Number of Representatives elected
            Q = Quota required to be elected.

Substituting the formula for n into the first equation, we come up with

Q = ((V/((V/5)+0.5)+1))+1
or:

Q = (V/(0.2V) + 0.5) + 1

Anyway, it's not too hard to put the numbers into a spreadsheet and then graph the results... it only takes three columns.

The first column is V, the second column is n and the third column is Q. Obviously there's a header row to have each of those. In cell A2, you can enter "1" and in A3, etc, "2" (or "=A2+1" or just Fill Series). In cell B2, you can enter "=INT((A2/5)+0.5)" and you can copy and paste for all cells in column B. In cell C2, you can enter "=(A2/(B2+1))+1" and copy and paste for all cells in column C. You can chart the results if you wish.

For the last election, with 32 voters, we would have elected 6 representatives and each would have required 5.571429 votes to be elected. I could re-calculate the elections results, but I don't think we'd have any surprises.

Obviously all this ignores the "Maximum 10 Representatives" element of the Amendment, but by setting a fixed quota and ignoring this maximum, the size of the Assembly will grow slowly as the number of citizens increases (at a rate of one new representative for every five new voters) allowing us to continue holding competitive elections.
Logged
Dr. Cynic
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,417
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.11, S: -6.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #461 on: October 25, 2009, 11:14:15 PM »

My friends, I'm afraid I'm not the best with numbers. I think basically a simple solution would be one Assembly member for every ten registered citizens... Which would go about five for the next assembly. Wouldn't it make it a hell of a lot more simplified that way?
Logged
Robespierre's Jaw
Senator Conor Flynn
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,129
Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -8.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #462 on: October 25, 2009, 11:23:36 PM »

I concur with fellow Representative Cynic in this latest debate. Not only as I deem it far more simplistic but we must brace ourselves for an onslaught of a lack of voter activity, something I and other Northeasterners have witnessed in the past. Although the Northeast is a hub of activity at the present, such action is bound to conclude at some stage. And I believe upon the ratification of the Strategic Registration Amendment that process will be as inevitable as the failure of New Coke in 1985.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #463 on: October 26, 2009, 03:49:26 AM »

I really hold to keeping a link between votes and number of reps. This is the fairest way to ensure that NE active citizens will be decently represented. I think it would make no sense to have, for example, 6 member with 12 voters, or 3 members with 30 voters.
The number of representatives we need is intrinsically linked with the number of voters. My only mistake was not to understand this when I wrote the CRA.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #464 on: October 26, 2009, 07:44:42 AM »

My friends, I'm afraid I'm not the best with numbers. I think basically a simple solution would be one Assembly member for every ten registered citizens... Which would go about five for the next assembly. Wouldn't it make it a hell of a lot more simplified that way?

Since I'm horrible with numbers, it sound very reasonable
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #465 on: October 26, 2009, 08:00:11 AM »

I know I'm no longer an Assemblyman, but I'm going to use the privilege usually extended former members to access the floor.

Guys: This past regional election was a confused clusterfuck.  No one knew how many seats were up for election until after the election. That's inexcusable.  Set it at 6 (or 5, which is probably even better) and just lock the number in.  There's no need for formulas.

If five/six proves too high due to later inactivity, you can revisit the issue.

But please.  Make it a permanent-sized body.  There's no reason to make this miserably complicated for no reason other than someone's desire to see things get miserably complicated.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #466 on: October 26, 2009, 08:06:40 AM »

I know I'm no longer an Assemblyman, but I'm going to use the privilege usually extended former members to access the floor.

Guys: This past regional election was a confused clusterfuck.  No one knew how many seats were up for election until after the election. That's inexcusable.  Set it at 6 (or 5, which is probably even better) and just lock the number in.  There's no need for formulas.

If five/six proves too high due to later inactivity, you can revisit the issue.

But please.  Make it a permanent-sized body.  There's no reason to make this miserably complicated for no reason other than someone's desire to see things get miserably complicated.

Hm, why not? That's good point as well.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #467 on: October 26, 2009, 08:24:47 AM »

There's no reason to make this miserably complicated for no reason other than someone's desire to see things get miserably complicated.

I'm sorry to see once again I'm fighting against everybody. The simplest solution isn't always the better, and people really need to think about every eventuality before peremptorily claiming : "Let's make so, it's simpler !".
Logged
cinyc
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,721


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #468 on: October 26, 2009, 02:21:12 PM »
« Edited: October 26, 2009, 05:35:06 PM by cinyc »

Given the interest in setting the number of representatives at a fixed number, I'm going to formally offer an amendment to the Seats Number Amendment, which I assume will be deemed unfriendly and put to a vote:

1. Article V Section vii) of the New Northeast Constitution is deleted and replaced with the following:
2. Five Reps shall be elected.


Fixing the number of seats makes sense.  In the last election, because few Northeast citizens seemed to know how many Representatives were going to be elected, we were told to rank at least 6 choices, even though there were 8 open seats.  The result was an uncompetitive election.  Some Representatives were surprised that they had even won.  

The current formula is too complex for a simple game - and I don't think a formula tying seats to votes would be better.  No one would know how many Reps we have until AFTER the election - so no one would know how many folks they needed to vote for.  It also potentially invites fraud - getting more zombies to vote so that your seat is ensured.

I may lose my seat as a result of setting the Assembly at 5, but it's the right thing to do.  It makes more sense than setting the size at six because ties are less likely.  And it makes a 2/3rds override in the next Amendment to be brought to the floor mean something, since you'd need 4 our of 5 to support an override.  With an Assembly of 6, 2/3rds is the same as a simple majority - 4 out of 6.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #469 on: October 26, 2009, 02:29:59 PM »

Yes, this is unfriendly. It seems that the battle is already lost but can not accept it just because you want to make it simpler. The argument "It's too complicated" makes no sense. As for zombies, people who want to use them will do whatever the system is.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #470 on: October 26, 2009, 02:37:33 PM »

Yes, this is unfriendly. It seems that the battle is already lost but can not accept it just because you want to make it simpler. The argument "It's too complicated" makes no sense. As for zombies, people who want to use them will do whatever the system is.

It's not that it's too complex, it's that it's too unstable.  A legislative body needs some modicum of stability—people need to have a basic concept of how it works.  No one knew what the heck was going on after the last election, and that's a problem.

If you REALLY want the size of the Assembly tied to the size of the active population, allow for a periodic redistricting, say, twice a year.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #471 on: October 26, 2009, 03:26:11 PM »

Yes, this is unfriendly. It seems that the battle is already lost but can not accept it just because you want to make it simpler. The argument "It's too complicated" makes no sense. As for zombies, people who want to use them will do whatever the system is.

It's not that it's too complex, it's that it's too unstable.  A legislative body needs some modicum of stability—people need to have a basic concept of how it works.  No one knew what the heck was going on after the last election, and that's a problem.

If you REALLY want the size of the Assembly tied to the size of the active population, allow for a periodic redistricting, say, twice a year.

Ok, I guess I'm not in position to impose my views.

Here is my proposal :


1. Article V Section vii) of the New Northeast Constitution is amended as follows :
2. Five Reps shall be elected. This provision can be amended by law every January and July if the Assembly considers it necessary.
Logged
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,556


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #472 on: October 26, 2009, 03:27:16 PM »

Yes, this is unfriendly. It seems that the battle is already lost but can not accept it just because you want to make it simpler. The argument "It's too complicated" makes no sense. As for zombies, people who want to use them will do whatever the system is.

It's not that it's too complex, it's that it's too unstable.  A legislative body needs some modicum of stability—people need to have a basic concept of how it works.  No one knew what the heck was going on after the last election, and that's a problem.

If you REALLY want the size of the Assembly tied to the size of the active population, allow for a periodic redistricting, say, twice a year.

Ok, I guess I'm not in position to impose my views.

Here is my proposal :


1. Article V Section vii) of the New Northeast Constitution is amended as follows :
2. Five Reps shall be elected. This provision can be amended by law every January and July if the Assembly considers it necessary.

I know this may sound stupid, since you proposed it, but is this friendly? Smiley
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #473 on: October 26, 2009, 03:30:04 PM »

Yes, this is unfriendly. It seems that the battle is already lost but can not accept it just because you want to make it simpler. The argument "It's too complicated" makes no sense. As for zombies, people who want to use them will do whatever the system is.

It's not that it's too complex, it's that it's too unstable.  A legislative body needs some modicum of stability—people need to have a basic concept of how it works.  No one knew what the heck was going on after the last election, and that's a problem.

If you REALLY want the size of the Assembly tied to the size of the active population, allow for a periodic redistricting, say, twice a year.

Ok, I guess I'm not in position to impose my views.

Here is my proposal :


1. Article V Section vii) of the New Northeast Constitution is amended as follows :
2. Five Reps shall be elected. This provision can be amended by law every January and July if the Assembly considers it necessary.

I know this may sound stupid, since you proposed it, but is this friendly? Smiley

On behalf of Rep. Hamilton I have to communicate he'd accept this as a friendly only with 6 members
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #474 on: October 26, 2009, 05:23:18 PM »

Article V, Section 7 of the Constitution is amended as follows:
The number of Representatives shall be set by statute.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 ... 239  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.086 seconds with 14 queries.