Cris and Windjammer Senate tracker (now a more qualitative analysis of activity)

[windjammer]

Good day everyone!
Just to tell you that I will start doing analysis of the senate votes:
- a foreign score ranking the senators according to their vote on foreign issues: a 0% score would mean that the senator is hawkish (by atlasian standards), and a 100% score would mean that the senator is dovish.
-an economic score: 0%= economically progressive, 100%= pro free market
- a social score: 0%= socially progressive 100%= socially conservative
- an activity score: 0%= the senate has missed every vote. 100%= the senator hasn't missed a single vote.

I believe that the current problem with the senate as an institution is that the people doesn't know really how the senators vote. I would like to improve the relations between the senators and the People.


I plan to do that monthly. For February, I will just post the activity scores of the senators:

ACTIVITY SCORE (February):
Bore: 100%
Windjammer: 100%
Cris: 100%
TNF: 96%
Yankee: 92%
Lief: 84%
Cranberry: 80%
SWE: 80%
Polnut: 36%
Bacon King: 12%

3 senators never missed a vote in February.
5 senators missed less than 10% of the votes.
2 senators missed more than half of the votes.
25 votes were casted in February.

[windjammer]

Oh and it appears that Cris was doing something similar too and he will publish soon.
So, I'm renaming "Windjammer Senate tracker" "Cris and Windjammer senate tracker" .

[windjammer]

Do you count just final votes or also amendment votes / motions and so on?

80% definitely needs improvement from my side, though I believe this comes from a four-day leave of absence, I recall that I did not miss a vote outside this period.

I count every vote, final and amendments .

Oh yes, I totally forgot you were on leave of absence during 4 days. I won't change your score it would be a total mess for me if I have to count every leave of absence. But 80% isn't a too bad score tbh

[windjammer]

Do you count just final votes or also amendment votes / motions and so on?

80% definitely needs improvement from my side, though I believe this comes from a four-day leave of absence, I recall that I did not miss a vote outside this period.

I count every vote, final and amendments .

Oh yes, I totally forgot you were on leave of absence during 4 days. I won't change your score it would be a total mess for me if I have to count every leave of absence. But 80% isn't a too bad score tbh

Okay thank you.

Such would be hard, yes, but I guess if you really want objective comparisons, this would be the way to go. See for example the case of Polnut, who objectively is one of the most active Senators in the chamber, but in this case just has a score of 40 - which is, if you take in account his leave of absences, not so much a thing, but if you do not, distorts the picture heavily.

Well, Cris has the active scores with the LOA counted. So I guess that solves the problem . Publishing the 2 scores would be a good balance yes.

I won't reveal the scores because Cris wants to do that at the end of the week. But there is only one senator whose score is significantly improved, and this is you. So except you, it didn't change a lot counting LOA or not .

[windjammer]

Expulsions forthcoming, jambles?

Not really, you're not in the senate, so at least every senator has posted something in the senate threads during the last month.

[windjammer]

I just realized I made a mistake. Polnut's activity score isn't 40%; but 36%.

My apology, this has been corrected.

[windjammer]

I just realized I made a mistake. Polnut's activity score isn't 40%; but 36%.

My apology, this has been corrected.

As others have said, these aren't really useful or accurate scores if you count votes which occurred during LOAs.  I also think that counting amendment votes isn't the best idea, but that's obviously your call.  How do you count "abstain" votes, btw.

Abstain votes??? Well, they voted so I don't see why I shouldn't count their vote???

And FTR: the only persons that hves taken a leave of absence in February were Cranberry and SWE. So except for them, the voting score wouldn't change.

[windjammer]

I just realized I made a mistake. Polnut's activity score isn't 40%; but 36%.

My apology, this has been corrected.

As others have said, these aren't really useful or accurate scores if you count votes which occurred during LOAs.  I also think that counting amendment votes isn't the best idea, but that's obviously your call.  How do you count "abstain" votes, btw.

Abstain votes??? Well, they voted so I don't see why I shouldn't count their vote???

And FTR: the only persons that hves taken a leave of absence in February were Cranberry and SWE. So except for them, the voting score wouldn't change.

I agree about abstain votes, I just wanted to make sure you were counting them.  I didn't realize at first that this was just for February, so it might be good to emphasize that a little more (maybe bold it rather than just putting it in the opening post in parentheses).  Just a thought.

Well, good idea.

[windjammer]

There is a bizarre fascination with the Atlasian elite and "activity" measured by presence at votes. Is someone who votes on everything but does not contribute to debate any better than someone who contributes to debate and skips the procedural stuff? Those in the second category, of course, are more like real leaders than the former.

I'm sure we could replace SWE, e.g. with a robot that votes yes or no with equal proability and no one would notice the difference. That's a sign that Windjammer's measure is flawed.

Well, Foucaulf, I just counted how many votes every senator missed, I don't understand why it is a problem???

(Yes, your attempt of getting more votes at the People's convention isn't fooling anyone)

[windjammer]

Well, I simply don't understand how posting activity scores can be controversial . And I don't understand why people are saying I'm "over-excited" while defending myself. Well, I prefer to suspend this experience. This is a shame because I didn't want to be controversial.

[windjammer]

After some thought, I decide to reopen the tracker. But seriously guys, there isn't any bad intent behind my tracker.

Word counts of debate (excluding bore); this is for everything in Feb on page 2 + the wrong choice
 BK   3
LIEF   20
POLNUT   26
SWE   47
CRANBERRY   73
TNF   100
CRIS   109
WINDJAMMER   143
YANKEE   225

[windjammer]

I do hope that those who wanted to have a more qualitative analysis of activity are happy. I have listened to their concerns .

[windjammer]

So to sum up the 2 measures of activity:
Quantitative:
ACTIVITY SCORE (February):
Bore: 100%
Windjammer: 100%
Cris: 100%
TNF: 96%
Yankee: 92%
Lief: 84%
Cranberry: 80%
SWE: 80%
Polnut: 36%
Bacon King: 12%

Qualitative:
Word counts of debate (excluding bore); this is for everything in Feb on page 2 + the wrong choice
 BK   3
LIEF   20
POLNUT   26
SWE   47
CRANBERRY   73
TNF   100
CRIS   109
WINDJAMMER   143
YANKEE   225

If you have any concerns or any ideas of improving it, I'm of course ready to hear. But please, just to remind everyone, there is no attack made against any senator. This is just numbers!

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, you're right hehe .

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Thank you for your support! I quite agree with you and that's why both Cris and myself just posted the results and didn't want to comment. People are free to interpret the numbers as they want.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's a really good idea Nix. I just made that for February:

Number of amendments proposed by senators in February
TNF: 8
Bore: 4
Cris: 3
Windjammer: 3
Lief: 2
Cranberry: 1
Bacon King: 0
SWE: 0
Polnut: 0
Yankee: 0

[windjammer]

Oh you're talking about the IRC? hahahahaha
You have a such selective memory. You seem to forget that just before what you're mentioning, some people from your party were attacking my party ("he's a professional troll" etc etc).

[windjammer]

I unfortunatelt don't find the convo anymore. But yes, what it was saying by one of your members was that Lief was a professional troll and that he would be a terrible chair. So do not expect me not to retaliate.

I find it funny to be lectured by you on this matter because you and your party have said much more terrible about me on the IRC. Shall I remind you when you were accusing me of having said nasty comments about the mental health of one of the members of your party, which was obviously not true?

I don't understand what you want seriously by posting your 500 words dissertations. Do you want me to apologize? I won't. So deal with it. I would appreciate you not to pollute my tracker with that and if you want to continue the convo, you can PM me.

[windjammer]

Well,
If sawx, you want to continue the talk, please PM me.


Just to say that Cris will soon post his "Who votes with who" tracker .

[windjammer]

I have a question. Is there a fixed period time for voting in all the votes taken into account for the activity statistics. Does it vary if it's a final vote or vote on amendment and did it happen votes were closed early because a requiring number of voters was reached so the voting period closed early.

Good questions:
-Well, when there is a majority of Aye and Nay, bore says "senators have 24 hours to change their vote". Everyone who has voted during this period of "24 hours vote change" has obviously his vote counted.
- Well, I don't make any difference between amendment votes and between final votes. I will however for my "foreign, economic, social" scores because in that case I believe final votes are more important.

[windjammer]

This is great information Cris and Windjammer. Sorry for questioning you guys earlier.

I know we don't have really "good relations" right now Maxwell. But seriously, you did nothing wrong. You have the right to question us!

[windjammer]

Here we go!

This seems to have been lost from the attention within this whole debate, but wow, that's some interesting stuff

Thank you Cranberry.
Yes, Cris is doing an amazing stuff and I can't wait for the other results .

[windjammer]

Really interesting. Quite surprised!

[windjammer]

By the way Foucaulf, for what is worth, even if your current character is basically "MUH LABOR", I do like you at personal level. I find your speech to be hilarious (like when you compare me with Beria hahahahaha) and I respect your political skills in the game too (you almost toppled an incumbent laborite governor in the most laborite region).
So if you have any advice to give in order to improve this tracker, you're more than welcome .

[windjammer]

I'd love to see one w/ TNF

Me too .

[windjammer]

Lief: The Most Independent Senator.

Proud to be the senator voting the most with you Friend

[windjammer]

Aw man I wish someone had done these charts when I was in the Senate!

If I recall correctly, you were the "centrist senator" for foreign policy. Analyzing yours votes, how much you voted with the other senators, would have been indeed interesting .