Legislation to make elections shorter?

[Earth]

Alright, maybe it's just me..but three weeks for delegate elections and two for officers..are very very long time periods. I mean, three weeks is a 3/4ths of a month basically. And a week for voting to pass legislation..not as bad, but still.

I think we should attempt to shorten them and make them more, well, reasonably timed.

Obviously this legislation wouldn't change the currently running elections, but for the future..

I mean, the WAD race debate is non-existant right now and we aren't really going anywhere there...and voting hasn't even started.

Thoughts?

[Cove]

I'd say decrease officer elections to 7 days, 3 for debate, 4 for voting.

Delegate elections to two weeks, 1 for debate, 1 for voting.

[Feux]

I like what Jamie said.

[Thought Transference]

Unless my memory has completely failed me, the point of the "long" time period for elections was to make provision for those citizens that don't log in every day and might otherwise be unable to participate in the election process. It's an accommodation for anyone among us who particularly suffer from RL delusional disorder.

[Simon Cowell of the RR]

A horrible illness, I agree.
Shorter elections would be great, especially understanding that Officers can be challenged at any time.
However, not by much.
I suppose what we would need to find out is how active the forum users are. Would an extra week really pull in that many people?

[Guy]

C: Votes in the Assembly are visible to all citizens, and last for seven four days.

C: Any citizen who also wishes to submit a challenge may do so during the first week of elections in the case of a challenge for Delegate, or during the first six four days of elections in the case of a challenge for Officer. No further challenges will be accepted during the elections after this period.

D: Once the challenge period has concluded, a period of campaigning will follow in cases of elections of the Delegate, during which candidates are encouraged to lobby citizens for their votes. This campaigning period shall last seven three days.

E: After the campaigning period is completed in cases of Delegate elections or after the challenge period has concluded in cases of Officer elections, the Assembly will vote to elect the Delegate or Officer as set out in Article 3, except that in the case of Delegate elections the vote shall last a week. Candidates may campaign during voting.

[Thought Transference]

I still don't see the argument for shortening the campaign and voting, especially for Delegate, considering that not everyone is free to log in every day or, in some cases, every two or three days. I can imagine a situation where the election(s) fall at a bad time, perhaps even for some ordinarily attentive and diligent citizens. Our present time periods allow their participation where the proposed shorter periods would not.

Until this past December, I would have said that it's unlikely almost to the point of impossibility that a Delegate ever would resign so as to make the campaign/election period span the Christmas/Chanukkah holiday period. I would have been wrong. I can't say how many citizens did or didn't log in as regularly as usual due to travel for the holiday period; I didn't realize it would be a useful statistic to gather. But I know I was here less than usual at some points even though I tried not to be absent. What time I did have was often rushed.

And then there is the accursed RL Disorder which can catch out even the most dedicated for a few days or even a week at a time, whether through work demands or illness or family obligations. Barring prolonged hospital stays, our present period allows for things like a few days of flu, or working extra shifts, or even a work-related trip.

In all these cases I can see that the longer period for debate/election we already have might conceivably be the difference between some citizens being able to participate in the debate and then the voting, and being eliminated from the democratic procedure.

FWIW, I do happen to know people in NS who found themselves for various reasons not online for a week or more around Christmas; two of them for a fortnight. If there were people similarly inactive over the holidays here in TRR, they probably will be grateful for the current length of our process.

One last thought: while I can see Simon's point about being able to challenge Officers at any time, what would concern me is that this could lead to a "elect in haste, repent at leisure" approach to TRR leadership that would create instability and discontinuity in our governance. I would submit that this might prove to be a bad thing if it encouraged even more Officer challenges. The chaos it could generate isn't worth the appearance of extra activity it would create.

BTW, I'm not arguing that the present longer period pulls people in who otherwise wouldn't participate, I'm arguing that the proposed shorter period might conceivably shut people out who currently have opportunity to participate.

[Christian Democrats]

I tend to agree with Thought Transference on this issue. I like the current electoral process.

I would like a constitutional amendment somewhat like what occurs with recess appointments in the U.S. For example:

When there is a vacancy in the Cabinet, the Delegate is authorized to appoint a temporary Officer, who shall hold his or her position until the conclusion of an election to fill said vacancy.

Also, there could be a constitutional amendment somewhat like this:

When the Delegate resigns from office, he or she may appoint someone to fulfill the in-game and forum duties of said office until the conclusion of an election of a successor for that position.

[Spartan Termopylae]

I certainly dont see a point in those two

[Earth]

I could possibly see CD's first one, yes, though I fear that that would bias elections..heavily. And thus would be against it.

The second one..most certainly not. Again, it'd bias the populous towards one person.. and if there came a case where in-game the delegate, a vice delegate should be moved up rather than just an appointee...though in that case I'd much prefer to ask one of our allies to help us while we're transitioning.

I can understand keeping Officer elections the way they are, but I think that we should shorten the delegate ones. I mean, in the current format they take the better portion of a month. Shorten them from three weeks to two--that still allows for one week of campaigning and challenging, and one week of voting. In the last year we elected Sedge, Guy, and now are electing someone else. That's..nine weeks of elections. 9/52...17% of the year has been spent with a non-government. That much time was, well, to put it bluntly, wasted. While I'll admit that's largely been a failure to have a steady delegate, but still! We're still giving two weeks for people to come in and realize that there are elections going on--that's more than most regions already.

[Goobergunchia]

I don't see the need for two weeks of campaigning for Delegate elections. I really don't think we'd lose anything by removing the week between the end of the challenge period and the vote.

One idea I had for expediting voting while still ensuring full participation would be a "snowball provision" that allows votes to end early if the result is obvious. Votes would initially last four days. (I'm getting that number from the WA resolution voting period.) If one side has a supermajority (2/3 or 3/4), the vote is closed. Otherwise it gets extended for three more days.

[Christian Democrats]

I agree that we should remove the campaigning week that occurs between the nominations period and the election.

@ Earth

To prevent bias in elections:

When there is a vacancy in the Cabinet, the Delegate is authorized to appoint a temporary Officer, who shall hold his or her position until the conclusion of an election to fill said vacancy. No person who is appointed a temporary Officer is allowed to run in the election to fill the aforementioned vacancy.

[Guy]

When the Delegate resigns from office, he or she may appoint someone to fulfill the in-game and forum duties of said office until the conclusion of an election of a successor for that position.

This has already happened during a previous Delegate's administration.

4+0+4 for Officer and 7+3+7 for Delegate sounds reasonable to me.

[North East Somerset]

How many people typically vote in the latter half of a 7 day election period? It seems rather unneccessarily long. Although in practise I appreciate some people will treat it as extended campaigning period and hold their vote till nearer the end. So my question is more like; how many people that haven't logged on in the first 4 days, vote in latter 3 days. I doubt it's many...

How about 4+0+4 and 7+3+4.

If you miss a 4 day voting period, with 10 days of pre-warning there is an election, sorry, but you just can't be that interested in the outcome...

[Thought Transference]

Sorry NES, I'm not convinced. It's not unreasonable to take our time when picking a Delegate, and if the time seems too long then perhaps the real problem is that we don't use it rigorously enough in the screening process.

The one thing I would say is that we might want to use the time better in engaging the candidates to establish that their foreseeable circumstances in RL are likely to let them hold office for a reasonable period. None of us can be absolutely sure of the future, but perhaps we should ask candidates to look more closely at what is possible. Of course we and they have to allow for RL to mess things up --- "the best laid plans of mice and men" and all that --- but it's not unreasonable to suggest that candidates exercise wisdom and foresight as part of their candidacy, in the hope that it'll also stimulate them to exercise those qualities if they're elected.

And if a Delegate could last, say, a minimum of 6 months, it would seem less burdensome that we had taken our time over electing them.

[Earth]

But..only Kandy's nation/Naivetry has done that in recent history.

I think Officer elections should be shortened to one week--3 days campaign, 4 days voting.

Delegate elections to two weeks--one week of campaigning and announcing, one week of voting.

Just my take. *shrugs*

[Guy]

But..only Kandy's nation/Naivetry has done that in recent history.

Nope.

[Hileville]

I think Officer elections should be shortened to one week--3 days campaign, 4 days voting.

Delegate elections to two weeks--one week of campaigning and announcing, one week of voting.

I agree.

[Evil Wolf]

Sounds good to me.

[Earth]

But..only Kandy's nation/Naivetry has done that in recent history.

Nope.

Served over six months as delegate? O.o

I said recent history. I mean, I don't want to argue this point at all, though now I am a bit curious.

So we're looking at something like:

C: Any citizen who also wishes to submit a challenge may do so during the first week of elections in the case of a challenge for Delegate, or during the first six three days of elections in the case of a challenge for Officer. No further challenges will be accepted during the elections after this period.

D: Once the challenge period has concluded, a period of campaigning will follow in cases of elections of the Delegate, during which candidates are encouraged to lobby citizens for their votes. This campaigning period shall last seven days.

E: After the campaigning period is completed in cases of Delegate elections or after the challenge period has concluded in cases of Officer elections, the Assembly will vote to elect the Delegate or Officer as set out in Article 3, except that in the case of Delegate elections the vote shall last a week. Candidates may campaign during voting.

Depending on whether you want to call the time period the 'challenge period' or the 'campaigning period'.

[Evil Wolf]

Hmm, I'm not sure Mr Nonchalant served more than six months and I don't know enough about the delegate who lead the attack on TEP to give an educated guess as to how long he served, but I'm going to take a stab in the dark and say someone like that can't sit still for very long.

[Earth]

If it was for over six months than time moved much faster than I thought. O.o

But either way, that is not the point. Does that look good, something we could put to a vote soon...?

[North East Somerset]

I was gonna argue when elections conclude. Look, here is an example of a Delegate vote, and everyone voted in the first 4 days. So we don't need 7 day elections, 4 days is ample. But then Elu ruined it. Always ruining things.

[Thought Transference]

For myself, NES, I can say I was lucky to be able to vote when I did. I've been on my travels again, and my schedule of when I can take time off is always unpredictable. Today is the first day I was sure I could be here and if I hadn't been able to find a connection while I was otherwise engaged, I'd have been voting right now.

Just saying.

[North East Somerset]

For myself, NES, I can say I was lucky to be able to vote when I did. I've been on my travels again, and my schedule of when I can take time off is always unpredictable. Today is the first day I was sure I could be here and if I hadn't been able to find a connection while I was otherwise engaged, I'd have been voting right now.

No you wouldn't. The vote would have been over anyway.