Progressive Union HQ

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

I would also prefer PR-STV.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

I think PR-STV could work, even if I'd need a crash course on how to calculate it.

Another option would be to do a straight up Yes or No vote to endorse each candidate with a certain percent of the vote needed to endorse.

That's probably a better idea.  It'd be the easiest system to work with for endorsements, IMO.

[Flake]

I think PR-STV could work, even if I'd need a crash course on how to calculate it.

Another option would be to do a straight up Yes or No vote to endorse each candidate with a certain percent of the vote needed to endorse.

That's probably a better idea.  It'd be the easiest system to work with for endorsements, IMO.

I'd be supportive of that. It would be much easier to calculate.

[Citizen Hats]

I think PR-STV could work, even if I'd need a crash course on how to calculate it.

Another option would be to do a straight up Yes or No vote to endorse each candidate with a certain percent of the vote needed to endorse.

That's probably a better idea.  It'd be the easiest system to work with for endorsements, IMO.

I'd be supportive of that. It would be much easier to calculate.

STV Quota

Votes needed to win = (valid votes Cast/seats to fill +1) + 1

Avoid the problems made by transferring overvotes by simply transferring votes by order of votes cast

[GAworth]

THANKS Y'ALL!!!
My only problem could be, what if people don't wanna see all the seats endorsed? Could we do that under PR-STV?

[Citizen Hats]

That's a fair point. STV will always fill as many slots as you want it to fill. The present voting system would seem to enable more goals

[sentinel]

I would like to request the Progressive Union endorsement for Northeast Governor in the special election. The Progressive Union previously endorsed me for Governor this past October.

[Napoleon]

I would like to request the Progressive Union endorsement for Northeast Governor in the special election. The Progressive Union previously endorsed me for Governor this past October.

For whatever its worth, you have my support.

[GAworth]

We'll need some new planks to modify our bylaws for endorsement votes if we want to do that.

Here's one possibility:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Anyone is welcome to propose other planks or modifications to this one. 

I'd rather hold off on an endorsement vote until we finalize what we want to do with this, at least for the next few days.

I like this idea. It makes the most sense to me. Nice and simple.

[DemPGH]

I fully support a Yes or No vote with 60% required. Good idea.

[Flake]

Hmmm.. guess I should make this formal.

Motion to hold a vote on amending our by-laws for endorsement votes.  Any seconds?

I second this.

[GAworth]

Well I don't know if we want to do this or not, but should keep the automatic endorsement of all members section of our endorsements procedure, I know we still keep them in our votes although we already endorse them?

[GAworth]

Good catch GAworth.  I think party members should definitely be endorsed, though I would hope the party would vote to endorse them anyway...

We could change the plank to this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Glad I could help, so are the names of Party members going to appear on the ballot or will they be automatically endorsed, no vote needed. I am sure they can meet the threshold but  is it necessary?

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Aye.

[Napoleon]

AYE

[PJ]

Aye

[DemPGH]

Yes.

[Sec. of State Superique]

Aye!

[GAworth]

Aye

[Flake]

Nay

There are a lot of people who are very bad candidates, and I don't feel comfortable at all endorsing some of these people, and I think all members of our party should be democratically endorsed instead of this system.

[Flake]

I feel the party has a responsibility to endorse and support any of its members.  Individual members are still free to support/vote for whoever they want.

There is no reason for a party to endorse its own members without the members voting for it first. All candidates need to be held to the same standards by this party, no matter what party they're from.

[Spamage]

I feel the party has a responsibility to endorse and support any of its members.  Individual members are still free to support/vote for whoever they want.

There is no reason for a party to endorse its own members without the members voting for it first. All candidates need to be held to the same standards by this party, no matter what party they're from.

Don't want to interject if I'm not welcome, but isn't the sole point of a party to get its members elected so they can govern by the party's philosophies. If someones not automatically endorsed what the point of there being parties at all?

[Lumine]

I feel the party has a responsibility to endorse and support any of its members.  Individual members are still free to support/vote for whoever they want.

There is no reason for a party to endorse its own members without the members voting for it first. All candidates need to be held to the same standards by this party, no matter what party they're from.

Don't want to interject if I'm not welcome, but isn't the sole point of a party to get its members elected so they can govern by the party's philosophies. If someones not automatically endorsed what the point of there being parties at all?

I'm with Flo on this one (even if I decided not to vote), even if my reasons are based on a minor detail. Let's say someone enters the party just for the sake of getting endorsed, that would create a problem for the party's image, even if we just avoided voting for said candidate. When IBDD and I were members of the deceased UNDA, Kitteh joked that she could perfectly join just for the sake of trolling a little bit.

Besides, since our party is fairly big tent (or at least there's some variety to choose from), it's perfectly possible for members of all wings to be less supportive of members of the opposite wing, and I guess the more democratic method would be allowing a vote on that. We say that parties and their governing policies are the point of the game, but I think the thing that really drives the game is personalities and individuals.

[GAworth]

I feel the party has a responsibility to endorse and support any of its members.  Individual members are still free to support/vote for whoever they want.

There is no reason for a party to endorse its own members without the members voting for it first. All candidates need to be held to the same standards by this party, no matter what party they're from.

Don't want to interject if I'm not welcome, but isn't the sole point of a party to get its members elected so they can govern by the party's philosophies. If someones not automatically endorsed what the point of there being parties at all?

I'm with Flo on this one (even if I decided not to vote), even if my reasons are based on a minor detail. Let's say someone enters the party just for the sake of getting endorsed, that would create a problem for the party's image, even if we just avoided voting for said candidate. When IBDD and I were members of the deceased UNDA, Kitteh joked that she could perfectly join just for the sake of trolling a little bit.

Besides, since our party is fairly big tent (or at least there's some variety to choose from), it's perfectly possible for members of all wings to be less supportive of members of the opposite wing, and I guess the more democratic method would be allowing a vote on that. We say that parties and their governing policies are the point of the game, but I think the thing that really drives the game is personalities and individuals.

I feel like apologizing for opening this can of words, but it is a point that needs to be flushed out. It is a loose loose, if we need to vote, it could lead to divisions, if we don't, we could get trolls. I feel like voting will be better, however, I will approve this plan for know until I feel the Party can't fall apart.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I feel the party has a responsibility to endorse and support any of its members.  Individual members are still free to support/vote for whoever they want.

There is no reason for a party to endorse its own members without the members voting for it first. All candidates need to be held to the same standards by this party, no matter what party they're from.

Don't want to interject if I'm not welcome, but isn't the sole point of a party to get its members elected so they can govern by the party's philosophies. If someones not automatically endorsed what the point of there being parties at all?

I'm with Flo on this one (even if I decided not to vote), even if my reasons are based on a minor detail. Let's say someone enters the party just for the sake of getting endorsed, that would create a problem for the party's image, even if we just avoided voting for said candidate. When IBDD and I were members of the deceased UNDA, Kitteh joked that she could perfectly join just for the sake of trolling a little bit.

Besides, since our party is fairly big tent (or at least there's some variety to choose from), it's perfectly possible for members of all wings to be less supportive of members of the opposite wing, and I guess the more democratic method would be allowing a vote on that. We say that parties and their governing policies are the point of the game, but I think the thing that really drives the game is personalities and individuals.

I feel like apologizing for opening this can of words, but it is a point that needs to be flushed out. It is a loose loose, if we need to vote, it could lead to divisions, if we don't, we could get trolls. I feel like voting will be better, however, I will approve this plan for know until I feel the Party can't fall apart.

     Excuse me for intruding, but one suggestion I have heard (don't know if it was ever implemented by any party) was to have party members be endorsed by default, but allow a motion to unendorse a party member for a particular office. It would reduce potential for divisions and bitterness, but also allow for disassociaton from undesirable candidates if necessary.