Proposed Governor Vote System Change

Quite simply you should be allowed to vote only one shard. Either once per character or once per account, but either way you should only be allowed to vote on one shard.

The current system only encourages candidates to get votes from off-shard. Which of course means that most of the electorate has nothing to do with the shard where the voting occurs. As an alternative to cross-sharding votes, one could create endless new accounts, which is problematic in its own right.

Further, anyone who wants to win basically has to resort to these tactics or similar tactics.

Keeping things to one shard would technically not ensure cross-shard votes would not occur but it would mean that a vote on one shard would be a non-vote someplace else. The likely outcome would be that, in general, local elections would be kept, for the most part, local. And that makes sense.

Others have posted on this in previous years, I guess it's my turn this time -- if someone else did it this cycle, I missed it.

I wanted to post this before the elections are concluded to drive home the fact that my thoughts on this are unrelated to any particular outcome.
«1

Comments

  • PawainPawain Posts: 9,230
    Agree, 1 shard per account.
    Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
  • McDougleMcDougle Posts: 3,742
    edited June 2022
    Can ej accounts vote ? If so this rule or any worthless...
    Acknowledgment and accountability go a long way... 
  • PawainPawain Posts: 9,230
    edited June 2022
    McDougle said:
    Can ej accounts vote ? If so this rule or any worthless...
    No they can not.  But that does not stop the hate against them.
    Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
  •  The issue as I see it (all jokes in another thread about voting aside) is that you can in theory play on more than one shard. 

     Given that they track the age of  characters and  accounts though, I think a  character should need to have a minimum amount of time on a given shard to vote. One other safeguard might be to say require any such character also have at least 90 or  100 in  a single skill, to discourage people from simply parking characters on different shards to gain age and doing nothing else with them. 

     That would be my solution so as not to alienate anyone who seriously plays in more than one place, while discouraging the described cross shard voting. 
  •  The issue as I see it (all jokes in another thread about voting aside) is that you can in theory play on more than one shard.
    Yes, I understand that players can play on more than one shard. I am however, just trying to think realistically: the odds of someone who plays often enough on two (or more!) shards that it makes realistic sense that they should have the same impact on the community of all of those shards, versus the odds that votes are impacting communities that those voters aren't actually in.

    The former might happen. The latter, however, we know has happened. I freely admit that I've been roped into cross-shard voting in an attempt to maintain the community of my shard against similar efforts. (Back when the limits of the Governor program weren't clear it used to attract people who thought they'd be in a position to impact game mechanics.) It's been many years, fortunately! Because I really hate that. But I freely admit that I've done the activity I wish to ban.

    No voting system will be perfect and, truth be told, the Governor system may well have run its course as an idea.

    As long as it's still here, though, ultimately voting on a single shard per account simply makes more sense in terms of helping to ensure that the Governors reflect their shards' community to a greater degree.

    It's not about integrity or legality or anything you might hear about in terms of RL election, It's not about "buying" votes because whether you're trading favors, gold, votes, or just "I like so and so's posts on Stratics so I'm making a character on some other shard to support him or her," the impact is the same.

    it's quite simply about trying to maintain the community of a given shard.
  • McDougleMcDougle Posts: 3,742
    I play 50/50 origin and pac with 3 accounts and visit other shards frequently (not counting Atlantic for shopping trips) 
    Acknowledgment and accountability go a long way... 
  • McDougle said:
    I play 50/50 origin and pac with 3 accounts and visit other shards frequently (not counting Atlantic for shopping trips) 

    Please see the post above yours.
  • PawainPawain Posts: 9,230
    edited June 2022
    McDougle said:
    I play 50/50 origin and pac with 3 accounts and visit other shards frequently (not counting Atlantic for shopping trips) 
    Are you running for Governor on more than 1?

    If not you still get a vote on a shard, if a vote on another shard is that important to you, you can ask a player that was not going to vote anyway to cast for that Governor.
    Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
  • keven2002keven2002 Posts: 2,236
    Are governor races really still that competitive these days? On ATL (most populated shard) there are towns that will have people run unopposed and other towns where the incumbent isn't even a nominee. 

    No voting system will be perfect and, truth be told, the Governor system may well have run its course as an idea.

    Overall I think this pretty much sums it up. Aside from setting the town buff, I'm not sure what else the average governor does. I haven't seen a governor sponsored event (using an EM) in years. I've only seen the New Mag net toss happen by the governor, but TBH you don't have to be in office to run a public net toss (or any public event). At this point, being governor just seems like an additional title to have.
  • MerlinMerlin Posts: 211

    Voting mechanics should be left alone.   Each account should be able to vote once on each shard. 


  • PawainPawain Posts: 9,230
    keven2002 said:
    Are governor races really still that competitive these days? On ATL (most populated shard) there are towns that will have people run unopposed and other towns where the incumbent isn't even a nominee. 

    No voting system will be perfect and, truth be told, the Governor system may well have run its course as an idea.

    Overall I think this pretty much sums it up. Aside from setting the town buff, I'm not sure what else the average governor does. I haven't seen a governor sponsored event (using an EM) in years. I've only seen the New Mag net toss happen by the governor, but TBH you don't have to be in office to run a public net toss (or any public event). At this point, being governor just seems like an additional title to have.
    Atlantic is not known for community things that don't involve greed. They don't have complete artisan trees.
    Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
  • magrodnyc2magrodnyc2 Posts: 23
    Merlin said:

    Voting mechanics should be left alone.   Each account should be able to vote once on each shard. 



    i know a lot of people with 40-50 accs that help people on election, I mean, guarantee win
  • Lord_FrodoLord_Frodo Posts: 2,304
    Merlin said:

    Voting mechanics should be left alone.   Each account should be able to vote once on each shard. 



    i know a lot of people with 40-50 accs that help people on election, I mean, guarantee win
    And they paid for every one of those accounts.  1 vote per account per shard.
  •  Lord_Frodo said:
    Merlin said:

    Voting mechanics should be left alone.   Each account should be able to vote once on each shard. 



    i know a lot of people with 40-50 accs that help people on election, I mean, guarantee win
    And they paid for every one of those accounts.  1 vote per account per shard.

     So basically an endorsement for buying elections and super-PACs via an MMORPG.... interesting. 

     Perhaps one day The Avatar Of Virtue will return to Brittania and set all this right!

     All that aside, is there any benefit to actually becoming a gubbernor? 


  • YoshiYoshi Posts: 3,322
    edited June 2022
    Merlin said:

    Voting mechanics should be left alone.   Each account should be able to vote once on each shard. 


    “Merlin, this is not the first time you’ve expressed an opinion without explaining any reasoning behind it. Please attempt to do so rather than random blanket statements as this does not aid in any discussion.
    (Disclosure, I have no interest in this topic)”
    Posts on this account have been pre filtered from personal comment or opinion in an effort to suppress conservative views in order to protect the reader.
  • TXEggplantTXEggplant Posts: 164
    I don't really care about the votes. What I care about is the people who have all these accounts, use them to get voted in and then DO NOTHING.  Nothing. City Report "The coffers are full and everything is good." Or they do one event per month, right before the meeting. They make no announcements, they don't show up half the time or more than half and put the bare minimum in. 

    I mean, they put in all this work to log in with their gazillion accounts and get people from the actual shard they play on to come over to the shard they don't play on and vote for them to be a governor so they can get a title and do nothing. That is what I have an issue with. If you can get people to do this, why can't you get them to stay on that shard and play and make shards other than Atlantic more vibrant? *shakes head* 

    I think the goal was to get people on each shard who actually had like a group that they play with to get them elected and then parlay that into more shard participation with other groups. In some cases, they already do it but in other cases, like I mentioned above, they seem to just do it for a title, because they don't play on the shard, they don't care about participation and they certainly don't put any time or thought into RP or player run events. 

    Maith Ceol, Chesapeake
    Governor of Moonglow

    Discord: txeggplant
    maithceol@gmail.com
  • DrakelordDrakelord Posts: 1,743
     The issue as I see it (all jokes in another thread about voting aside) is that you can in theory play on more than one shard. 

     Given that they track the age of  characters and  accounts though, I think a  character should need to have a minimum amount of time on a given shard to vote. One other safeguard might be to say require any such character also have at least 90 or  100 in  a single skill, to discourage people from simply parking characters on different shards to gain age and doing nothing else with them. 


    Back when you could have more then one house I placed across all the American shards small towers, it was when they went to one house one shard (when you upgraded a house) you lost all those other houses.  Now I play across several shards today, and mine main characters are citizens of cities for the needed buff, so I vote for the ones that keep me happy.  I will say I would not mind seeing skill requirements for votes, I could live with that.
    Remove Trap = Bad News
    for
    Treasure Hunters
    Drakelord#5598
  • YoshiYoshi Posts: 3,322
    edited June 2022
    “One vote per account is consistent with any other electoral voting system. I can’t vote in every county, and you can’t vote in every state, and it’s like that for a reason”
    Posts on this account have been pre filtered from personal comment or opinion in an effort to suppress conservative views in order to protect the reader.
  • Lord_FrodoLord_Frodo Posts: 2,304
     Lord_Frodo said:
    Merlin said:

    Voting mechanics should be left alone.   Each account should be able to vote once on each shard. 



    i know a lot of people with 40-50 accs that help people on election, I mean, guarantee win
    And they paid for every one of those accounts.  1 vote per account per shard.

     So basically an endorsement for buying elections and super-PACs via an MMORPG.... interesting. 

     Perhaps one day The Avatar Of Virtue will return to Brittania and set all this right!

     All that aside, is there any benefit to actually becoming a gubbernor? 


    LMAO  Nothing in my statement endorses selling/buying vote it only supports the LAW that each paid account is entitled to a vote on every shard.  Typical leftest tactics stating falsehoods
  • MerlinMerlin Posts: 211
    Yoshi said:
    Merlin said:

    Voting mechanics should be left alone.   Each account should be able to vote once on each shard. 


    “Merlin, this is not the first time you’ve expressed an opinion without explaining any reasoning behind it. Please attempt to do so rather than random blanket statements as this does not aid in any discussion.
    (Disclosure, I have no interest in this topic)”
    My opinion, including any "blanket statements", are as valid as anyone else's.    If someone wants a change, the onus is on the person who wants the change to make their case, not the other way around.  I don't believe any change to the system is necessary and I don't feel the need to argue on someone else's turf. 

    Merlin said:

    Voting mechanics should be left alone.   Each account should be able to vote once on each shard. 



    i know a lot of people with 40-50 accs that help people on election, I mean, guarantee win

    There is nothing wrong with this.   I have 30+ accounts.   They are all paid for monthly.   I deserve the right to vote all of those accounts as I see fit. 
  • YoshiYoshi Posts: 3,322
    “The OP has indeed made a statement for their case, your statements as valid as they are, are contributing nothing.

    John from Tipton says he agrees
    Leslie from Southbank says she disagrees

    well now we have a balanced opinion…”
    Posts on this account have been pre filtered from personal comment or opinion in an effort to suppress conservative views in order to protect the reader.
  • MerlinMerlin Posts: 211
    Yoshi said:
    “The OP has indeed made a statement for their case, your statements as valid as they are, are contributing nothing.

    John from Tipton says he agrees
    Leslie from Southbank says she disagrees

    well now we have a balanced opinion…”
    Lucky for me, no one voted you the arbiter of what's considered a valid contribution and what isn't.  So troll elsewhere.  If you have something further to add, perhaps it should be on the OP's topic and not on whether or not my posts meet your personal standards. 

    I further repeat that voting mechanics should be left alone and don't require any of the changes discussed herein. 


  • YoshiYoshi Posts: 3,322
    edited June 2022
    "so rather than contributing any point at all to this thread, you've resorted to namecalling, and repeating your non post..
    The OP did not set up a poll, which is all you've contributed, a vote for no, with no reasoning. Perhaps if you could help us with how you came to your vote it would aid us to understand your perspective
    (just to re-iterate, I have no personal interest in this topic)”
    Posts on this account have been pre filtered from personal comment or opinion in an effort to suppress conservative views in order to protect the reader.
  • PawainPawain Posts: 9,230
    Yoshi said:
    "so rather than contributing any point at all to this thread, you've resorted to namecalling, and repeating your non post..
    The OP did not set up a poll, which is all you've contributed, a vote for no, with no reasoning. Perhaps if you could help us with how you came to your vote it would aid us to understand your perspective, this is what words are for"
    Read your signature.  He does not suppress his conservative views. He wants no change.

    Other than drama in some election cycles, the current method has been working.  Cities that have candidates have Governors.  
    Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
  • MerlinMerlin Posts: 211
    edited June 2022
    Yoshi said:
    "so rather than contributing any point at all to this thread, you've resorted to namecalling, and repeating your non post..
    The OP did not set up a poll, which is all you've contributed, a vote for no, with no reasoning. Perhaps if you could help us with how you came to your vote it would aid us to understand your perspective
    (just to re-iterate, I have no personal interest in this topic)”
    "Cool story.  Thanks."

    Pawain said:
    He wants no change.

    Other than drama in some election cycles, the current method has been working.  
    ^^^ This.

    It's not a broken system.  No changes are required.  Current system creates opportunities for some cross shard wheeling and dealing... alliances, if you will.  Forces players to go outside one big guild on one shard to win a competitive race.   The current suggestions would eliminate that.  Cross shard relationship building is a positive and should be encouraged. 
  • PawainPawain Posts: 9,230
    edited June 2022
    Merlin said:
    Yoshi said:
    "so rather than contributing any point at all to this thread, you've resorted to namecalling, and repeating your non post..
    The OP did not set up a poll, which is all you've contributed, a vote for no, with no reasoning. Perhaps if you could help us with how you came to your vote it would aid us to understand your perspective
    (just to re-iterate, I have no personal interest in this topic)”
    "Cool story.  Thanks."

    Pawain said:
    He wants no change.

    Other than drama in some election cycles, the current method has been working.  
    ^^^ This.

    It's not a broken system.  No changes are required.  Current system creates opportunities for some cross shard wheeling and dealing... alliances, if you will.  Forces players to go outside one big guild on one shard to win a competitive race.   The current suggestions would eliminate that.  Cross shard relationship building is a positive and should be encouraged. 
    Other than spawns it seems the large guilds do not control much.  You would think they could get together during the Castle design contest and make a Guild house Castle specifically for their use.

    That has not happened yet.

    Our guild on LS is able to have most of the Gov seats on LS.  We just want to make sure the Govs go to the meetings and all the wanted buffs are available somewhere.
    Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
  • MerlinMerlin Posts: 211
    Pawain said:
    Other than spawns it seems the large guilds do not control much.  You would think they could get together during the Castle design contest and make a Guild house Castle specifically for their use.

    That has not happened yet.

    Our guild on LS is able to have most of the Gov seats on LS.  We just want to make sure the Govs go to the meetings and all the wanted buffs are available somewhere.

    I understand your point, but I don't know if its an apples to apples comparison in the context of the Governor elections.   Big guilds can dominate the Governorships if they're coordinated.  UWF had five seats on Atlantic last cycle.   I would guess that on some of the less populated shards, other guilds have had more then that.   I think the Castle voting process is a bit more messy (i.e., list is too long, you have to visit each house to know what they are, it's all done on Test Center), but that's another topic altogether. 
  • ArchangelArchangel Posts: 460
    Each account should be able to vote only where said account has a house. Period.
  • keven2002keven2002 Posts: 2,236
    Still wondering why being governor even matters (aside from having the town buff); maybe I'm missing something.

    Does being a governor allow you to have EM like abilities to run events (ie place decorations that cannot be picked up and create a prize) or are they just like every other player run event? My understanding is that it's the latter (I believe it was once a colab with EMs but has long since stopped?). 
  • PawainPawain Posts: 9,230
    keven2002 said:
    Still wondering why being governor even matters (aside from having the town buff); maybe I'm missing something.

    Does being a governor allow you to have EM like abilities to run events (ie place decorations that cannot be picked up and create a prize) or are they just like every other player run event? My understanding is that it's the latter (I believe it was once a colab with EMs but has long since stopped?). 
    Governors get to sit at the table with the king during meetings. They can bestow titles upon citizens. They choose the town buffs. They control the content of the city news. They can put a poll on the town stone.

    I think that is all.
    Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
Sign In or Register to comment.