I don't get to vote in this poll, because I'm not a WA member, and have very recently joined this region, but IMHO, since environmental protection seems to be Forest's main concern, it would be wise to establish embassies only with regions that are tagged as eco-friendly and actually rank well on indicators such as weather, environmental beauty, etc.
That's a very valid point, but to my understanding, that makes Forest's embassies very niche and makes it difficult for us to expand our footprint, since there aren't too many regions with that tag that meet our requirements (compared to the entirety of NS). Having the tag is a major plus when looking for embassies, but not a mandatory requirement. The other indicators are also pretty telling when looking for an embassy, but once again, not mandatory.
To be clear, were we to go through with the influence requirement, I wouldn’t push for a tiered system or anything on the embassies themselves.
2000 is just the number coded into the game to define “influential” in polls, yes.
Requiring influentialness might also help to encourage endorsing and increased WA presence, because the more endorsements you gain, the faster you can vote.
I’m not sure I’d actually want to see it in practice (or that it would ever actually happen), but theoretically the influentialness requirement means that if there was someone you, for whatever reason, disapproved of, you could withhold your endorsement of them to make them take that much longer to be able to vote. A sort of “peer approval”.
EDIT: Another thing to consider is if we would want to use the influence requirement for FK voting as well.
As a nation relatively new in the region, I wouldn't mind this system, even though my influence is /very/ low (though I plan on joining the WA soon regardless). If anything, this system could encourage more nations to speak up regarding how they feel about certain policies. Just because some nations can't vote doesn't mean we can't post well formatted arguments for, or against certain policies. I think the RMB and forum have shown that Forest is open to fair discussion, and that many members will take note of what other nations think.
Re: poll/election procedures
Y'all are making this way the hell to complicated. All you really need to do is 1) ask a yes/no question; 2) throw an even-sided die #-of-nations-in-Forest times; 3) tally each odd roll as yes, even as no.
Over the long run, this random procedure and "true" voting are indistinguishable. I say keep it simple.
Eh, I still have zero idea what it's about. Been trying to find the rules but apparently you can't really find it? shock and horror
Conversely, it is pretty horrible for MUN. I had a friend here (who is attending Oxford now) who played NS and said that the GA resolutions weren't up to par and henceforth he didn't see a need to participate in them; additionally, I've seen more intricate things from my MUN friends as well and at the only two MUN conferences I attended so I think that's a sign?
I know you guys aren't Wysteria, but - would it be possible to just allocate members a set number of "votes" based on influence scores and just count that? so a bit like weighted voting where even newer members can participate. I'm just throwing up ideas, so don't take me seriously!
Hello there! Valentine Z here, yet again. Thought I will just drop by and say hello and whatnot. :P
It's been a while, I suppose! Just busy with school life, and other times, I spend my time on F7.
The United Socialist States of Caracasus, when are the writing contest submissions due by timezone & by specific deadline? By November 22, do you mean it's due the moment the clock hits midnight on November 21 and thereby becomes November 22, or before November 22 is over?
Does anyone have ideas for photo contest categories besides trees? Last year there were "nature in unexpected places", "weather", and "sunrise/sunset".
I would personally like an "after dark" category.
Maybe something specifically aquatic. Though I did really enjoy the "nature in unexpected places" last year too. I think a category addressing the mix of an urban setting and environment in a purposeful way might make a good category.
Hearing it's 2000 gives me pause.
I was in favour of an Influence requirement, but 2000 actually seems quite punitive. I've been going through non-WA nations in the region by Residency. Quite a few of the longest established barely reach the requirement and some don't.
Yeldan Nature Preserve -- here for 1,751.66 days (10th in our region for Residency) and Land o Birds -- 20th in the region for Residency, with 1,054 days -- don't make the 2000 mark (not to mention the people Uan's already mentioned).
Now that I know how many people would be impacted, I've actually gone the other way on this. I don't think I can support denying a vote to so many long-standing residents.
I'd rather we either went back to looking at new requirements of embassies, or instituted some kind of trial period for new embassies (say six months) after which we vote again to see if we're happy with how the embassy worked out and -- if not -- consider closure.
I might be a minority here that has an opinion that 'too much' embassies is fine, as long as they are good and active enough. Aren't Forest an inclusive region?
My suggestion, we shouldn't be more restrictive when it comes to new embassy. It has worked for years. But, to keep a quality list of embassied region, we need to review them every three months or so. If some are not meeting our requirements, become inactive, or it has dropped in quality, we should hold a vote whether to keep them or not. I think this wouldn't require constitutional changes.
Also, sorry if i'm not making sense. Writing this in English is harder than i thought it would be.
I'd note that my nation is 8th for Influence and 45th for Residency, primarily by endorsing anyone who endorses me and by being high profile.
Influence is primarily a function of endorsements, so non-WA nations have a hard time accumulating any significant amount, as do nations that don't do the whole auto-reciprocation thing.
I'd also note that Influence can be spent for various things like banjection, but I guess that the threshold is low enough that no delegate is going to drop below that number.
I's also note that any nation that goes on a journey to another region for ambassadorial or social reasons is going to find their residency reset, and their Influence rapidly plummeting.
I'd suggest that if you're looking to identify "citizens" then the best thing to do would be to go with self-identification, and to stipulate that the nation should not self-identify as a citizen of any other region. Policing that beyond that probably isn't worthwhile.