SENATE BILL: Reduction of Registration Requirements Amendment (Pass to Regions)

[Junkie]

If I may step in, as it was my idea that caused the confusion.  Here is the way I see it: there will be no more confusion than there already is.  Currently, someone needs to check at every election to make sure that voters have the right number of posts before every election.  People who miss are eventually dropped out.

As, if I am not mistaken, Kal's voter deletion act will require tracking of votes and their preservation, there will a record of the votes.

By letting people join Atlasia (I would propose without restrictions) but then requiring a certain number of posts before voting, you are actually getting them involved.  Thus, new people will be able to join a party, voice opinions, whatever...they are actually getting their posts and learning the system.  This will help them make informed decisions when it comes time for voting.  It took me some time to figure who was who and who stood for what.

It just seems win win for me.  No 'see ya kid come back in 50 posts" but at the same time, still using the requirements we have in place to prevent a wave in zombie voting (which by the way will never go away...you can't defeat it, you can only hope to contain it)

[Antonio the Sixth]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What that be sufficient?

No. The requirements to vote are still ridiculously low (WTF, 7 days and 50 posts ?).

Here's my proposal :
- Registration possible after 7 days.
- Voting possible 14 days after registration, and after one has reached 75 posts).

[Marokai Backbeat]

But what's the point?

I feel like this has been the critical question throughout this entire debate and I haven't seen much in the way of a satisfactory answer (and my carefully explained posts has gone entirely ignored by a certain Senator, despite apparently picking this as a pet cause) but at least the argument by Junkie about getting people involved before being able to vote is somewhat compelling.

Though I still don't see the point in much of this. If you're going to split requirements into two separate sets, you should keep the voting requirement at the same level of the current registration requirement to contrast to a lower requirement just to register. If you're lowering both, aside from the fact that I still do not see what an impact it would have at all, you may as well just keep them as the one same lowered requirement. Otherwise it's just a sneaky way of lowering what you wanted to lower in the first place.

Take a look at the registration thread over the past few months, people. Getting people to register isn't the problem. Keeping people in the game is the actual problem. Treat the right issue.

[tmthforu94]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What that be sufficient?

No. The requirements to vote are still ridiculously low (WTF, 7 days and 50 posts ?).

Here's my proposal :
- Registration possible after 7 days.
- Voting possible 14 days after registration, and after one has reached 75 posts).

I wasn't asking if the numbers were satisfactory to you, just if the setup was fine for the amendment. Apparently it is. I'd be fine bumping it up to 14 days on this, but I believe 50 is a better number than 75, just to discourage last-second spamming.

Something else to consider - I believe you have to be a citizen of Atlasia for a couple weeks in order to vote in elections. With this, we'd need to clarify whether the time started from when they became a citizen or when they became a voting citizen.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I guess the best answer I've seen so far is telling someone they can't register hurts their feelings. Maybe I'm just out of touch with the younger generation, but would that really deter someone from participating in threads? At least that is an attempt to provide me with an answer. Thanks, Junkie.

[Junkie]

I guess the best answer I've seen so far is telling someone they can't register hurts their feelings. Maybe I'm just out of touch with the younger generation, but would that really deter someone from participating in threads? At least that is an attempt to provide me with an answer. Thanks, Junkie.

Well, I would say it is a little bit more than just hurt feelings, but what do I know.  I fairly old so I know less than you about the younger generation.  Consider this:

1.) Over on my campaign post I detailed every registration since December 2010.  Ten individuals attempted to register but did not have enough posts.  Only four of them (40%) attempted again when they had the right number.  If that trend continues, that could be a lot potential posters that for some reason decide not to come back.


2.) I remember a number of people having some concerns when Agooji came back.  If I remember his apology correctly, part of what turned him in the first place were the strict rules.  It is possible that a "come back later" could have the same effect and lead to the next Hamilton who wants to stick to the "old guys"

3.) Just take a look at the boards within Atlasia.  Look at all the bickering, fighting, name calling that occurs when people change parties or even, and this one I still don't understand, change colors in the wiki.  We have seem many petty fights by established posters, why are we expecting new hopeful citizens to exhibit more self control and maturity than the vast majority of us here.

4.)  This is meant to be, or least shuld be, an open forum where we get to debate philsophy and politics by way of angaging election/government simulation game.  All strict rules does is take away from that concept.  Trying to stop the next Hamilton only increases the odd that you drive away the next Purple State, Yankee, Antonio, Dallas, or dare I say it Duke.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I guess the best answer I've seen so far is telling someone they can't register hurts their feelings. Maybe I'm just out of touch with the younger generation, but would that really deter someone from participating in threads? At least that is an attempt to provide me with an answer. Thanks, Junkie.

Well, I would say it is a little bit more than just hurt feelings, but what do I know.  I fairly old so I know less than you about the younger generation.  Consider this:

1.) Over on my campaign post I detailed every registration since December 2010.  Ten individuals attempted to register but did not have enough posts.  Only four of them (40%) attempted again when they had the right number.  If that trend continues, that could be a lot potential posters that for some reason decide not to come back.

But here's my concern: If people are that easily dissuaded from joining, are they people that we should have in Atlasia in the first place?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I guess the best answer I've seen so far is telling someone they can't register hurts their feelings. Maybe I'm just out of touch with the younger generation, but would that really deter someone from participating in threads? At least that is an attempt to provide me with an answer. Thanks, Junkie.

Well, I would say it is a little bit more than just hurt feelings, but what do I know.  I fairly old so I know less than you about the younger generation.  Consider this:

1.) Over on my campaign post I detailed every registration since December 2010.  Ten individuals attempted to register but did not have enough posts.  Only four of them (40%) attempted again when they had the right number.  If that trend continues, that could be a lot potential posters that for some reason decide not to come back.

But here's my concern: If people are that easily dissuaded from joining, are they people that we should have in Atlasia in the first place?

I was about to post that. We could have people sign up that never care enough to reach the requirements which really makes this bill counterproductive.

[Antonio the Sixth]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What that be sufficient?

No. The requirements to vote are still ridiculously low (WTF, 7 days and 50 posts ?).

Here's my proposal :
- Registration possible after 7 days.
- Voting possible 14 days after registration, and after one has reached 75 posts).

I wasn't asking if the numbers were satisfactory to you, just if the setup was fine for the amendment. Apparently it is. I'd be fine bumping it up to 14 days on this, but I believe 50 is a better number than 75, just to discourage last-second spamming.

Something else to consider - I believe you have to be a citizen of Atlasia for a couple weeks in order to vote in elections. With this, we'd need to clarify whether the time started from when they became a citizen or when they became a voting citizen.

Yeah, I forgot about that... That makes everything far more complicated. I don't think we should establish 3 different classes of citizens (registered Atlasian, registered voters and actual voters). But since there already are requirements for vote, we can make things even more simple.

For example, if today you have to be there for 14 days before registering, and you have to be registered for 14 days before posting, we can amend it so that it's 7-21 instead. Does someone know what are the requirements for vote ?

[bgwah]

^The current requirements are 25 posts in the last 8 weeks, IIRC.

Anyway, I have several comments:
1) Have we stopped to consider that perhaps the high posting requirements are why Hamilton ultimately gave up creating so many counts? I know that he's mostly gone now, but if we let our guard down it could happen again.
2) With that said, anyone who has followed my Atlasian politics over the years knows I favor lower posting requirements. I don't see anything obviously wrong with Junkie's proposal. Perhaps reverting to a lower registration requirement (I always liked 18 for the lolz) would be an acceptable compromise if the Senate doesn't want to completely eliminate the registration requirement.
3) While I don't necessarily support eliminating the registration posting requirement altogether, I do support getting rid of any requirement saying you can't register until your account is X days old. Please remember that with Hamilton, he made a bunch of accounts, and often wouldn't start using them until several months later---I don't think this law would have ever been effective in stopping sock accounts and instead just risks discouraging newbies. So put me down as someone who supports no account age requirement, or a very small one at the minimum.

[Marokai Backbeat]

3) While I don't necessarily support eliminating the registration posting requirement altogether, I do support getting rid of any requirement saying you can't register until your account is X days old. Please remember that with Hamilton, he made a bunch of accounts, and often wouldn't start using them until several months later---I don't think this law would have ever been effective in stopping sock accounts and instead just risks discouraging newbies. So put me down as someone who supports no account age requirement, or a very small one at the minimum.

You're not wrong that it's an imperfect measure, but if you axe the age requirement, it makes the entire thing meaningless. Before we had an age requirement people would just encourage their potential recruits to spam and register exactly on the nose. This can of course still happen, but it doesn't happen as often as it used to, and the age requirement also allows us to investigate, if necessary, new posters if they're at all suspicious, to prevent exactly the sort of thing that Hamilton wrought on us.

The account age requirement was conceived as an anchor for the posting requirement. If you remove that requirement, the only requirement to joining Atlasia at that point becomes spamming up to the required number and at that point, you may as well axe all requirements altogether.

These requirements were made to balance each other and complement each other in a way that would prevent as many unsavory cases as possible from joining. It's obviously never going to prevent them all, but it is observably true that they have been effective. The current requirements have been working well for this long, and though not perfect, have been as effective as possible without rising to the level of being destructive or intrusive. If you break them apart you make the requirements meaningless and you may as well just get rid of them entirely. It only makes sense for them to rise or fall together.

And also, for the bajillionth time in this debate: getting people to register isn't the problem in Atlasia. Keeping people in the game and continuing to keep the game as fresh as possible is what the problem is. We have plenty of people continuing to register, and as Junkie's stats actually prove, the requirements serve as a means to weed out those who aren't really that interested in Atlasia in the first place, and those who are willing to come back a second time for realsies. You are all addressing the wrong problem.

*continues grumbling even though everyone aside from Duke is clearly not listening*

[Junkie]

Marokai, I am listening.  I agree, the point is we need to keep people active in the game.  I just don't believe that having a registration requirement assists in that at all.  In my opinion, it may only serve to discourage.

In terms of your question of whether they would have been active if we had let them in, we will never know one way or another.  My point is that is we allow them to register and then get their voting requirement within in the game, we are working in activity in the game.

Last week, went to a club.  They would not let me in because I was wearing gym shoes.  I said f that and never went back.  Does that mean that if they had let me in I would have loved it, who knows.  But one thing it does mean is that I will never go there.

You are right, all of this for naught if we cannot keep people active and having fun and discussing the issues.  However, Bgwah is right as well, our current laws did not keep Hamilton from wrecking havoc (or others before him).  Hell, he still can get sock accounts in (as he has within the last year if I remember correctly) and work with others legally in the game to create drama.

We need new people and old people to want to stay.  I believe my proposal is only piece of the puzzle.  It gets new people in, forces them to be active to vote, and hoefully (if we are not all dicks) gets them to like it enough to stay.  Then, comes the issue of keeping them.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Right now, the constitution talks in terms of 'registered voter' rather than 'citizen.'  The assumption seems to be if you're not a registered voter you can't participate at all, but really the constitution already allows for someone to. I don't really understand why the Pre-Registraton Act failed.

I think the biggest problem for new members might be the confusion. When I first tried to vote for an amendment after I registered I didn't realize I hadn't been around long enough, so I was a bit frustrated that it was thrown out. Thanks to Marokai and Dallasfan, I think the Intro to Atlasia has been a bit improved since then, but I wonder - what ever happened to the Welcoming committee?

[Marokai Backbeat]

Marokai, I am listening.  I agree, the point is we need to keep people active in the game.  I just don't believe that having a registration requirement assists in that at all.  In my opinion, it may only serve to discourage.

In terms of your question of whether they would have been active if we had let them in, we will never know one way or another.  My point is that is we allow them to register and then get their voting requirement within in the game, we are working in activity in the game.

Last week, went to a club.  They would not let me in because I was wearing gym shoes.  I said f that and never went back.  Does that mean that if they had let me in I would have loved it, who knows.  But one thing it does mean is that I will never go there.

You are right, all of this for naught if we cannot keep people active and having fun and discussing the issues.  However, Bgwah is right as well, our current laws did not keep Hamilton from wrecking havoc (or others before him).  Hell, he still can get sock accounts in (as he has within the last year if I remember correctly) and work with others legally in the game to create drama.

We need new people and old people to want to stay.  I believe my proposal is only piece of the puzzle.  It gets new people in, forces them to be active to vote, and hoefully (if we are not all dicks) gets them to like it enough to stay.  Then, comes the issue of keeping them.

Compelling as always, Junkie. I'm willing to concede that pre-registration makes some amount of sense. Like Shua, thinking about it, I'm actually surprised as to why it failed in the first place. It was such a "passing through" proposal I didn't even remember it until Fritz brought it up in another thread.

I still firmly believe that they key issue here is keeping people interested once they're actually in the game, as opposed to just finding out ways to get new people in here and then we bore them to death with the obsession with the status-quo, but I'm starting to believe that, as long the requirement for voting is reasonable, that unrestricted registration, isn't as dangerous as I fear.

[Napoleon]

On behalf of the Northeast region, I would have to oppose any proposal which allows people to register as citizens earlier than they would be eligible to fully participate. As of now, the size of the Northeast Assembly is universally recognized as too large in size. The number of seats is based on the number of citizens. If some of the examples provided by Junkie were counted as citizens, that could result in a larger Northeast with no more active players than before. It is easier to live with the present system than to risk putting an undue burden on the citizens of the Northeast. I wish we could have our Constitution changed regarding this, but it's far from guaranteed that is currently possible.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

*continues grumbling even though everyone aside from Duke is clearly not listening*

Oh, I am listening.  Just don't have much to say, at present.

[Ban my account ffs!]

It's pretty apparent that Kalwejt and Antonio would turn Atlasia into a club of a few friends who they deemed worthy of the privilege... and they seem to have some big support behind them.

I guess I agree with Bgwah... having a low posting requirement while getting rid of waiting times is probably the best route.  But at this point I'm not sure if that will even get majority support.

In its current form, I will vote nay on this bill because it does not go far enough in reducing requirements.

I remember this supposed zombie invasion... and again... you'd think the world were ending by the way Antonio and Kalwejt speak of it... but really... we're still here.  I think general forum rules are good enough at this point to prevent another Hamilton style registration binge.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I'm amazed that anyone would think having your account be two weeks old and making 75 posts turns Atlasia into this super exclusive club of a few. That's such a melodramatic way of putting a relatively minor requirement that I doubt you can even seriously believe it.

And Kalwejt and Antonio? Am I invisible?

I'm starting to wonder whether or not you're actually seriously paying attention to this thread at all, considering how many people have started to come around to Junkie's general idea of how we could structure registration and voting eligibility. It's an idea that Antonio is fine with, an idea that Bgwah seems fine with, and an idea that I'm, at least, okay with. But you seem like you haven't even acknowledged that yet which leads me to believe that you're only reading this thread once in awhile, and haphazardly, when you actually do.

[Ban my account ffs!]

I'm amazed that anyone would think having your account be two weeks old and making 75 posts turns Atlasia into this super exclusive club of a few. That's such a melodramatic way of putting a relatively minor requirement that I doubt you can even seriously believe it.

And Kalwejt and Antonio? Am I invisible?

I'm starting to wonder whether or not you're actually seriously paying attention to this thread at all, considering how many people have started to come around to Junkie's general idea of how we could structure registration and voting eligibility. It's an idea that Antonio is fine with, an idea that Bgwah seems fine with, and an idea that I'm, at least, okay with. But you seem like you haven't even acknowledged that yet which leads me to believe that you're only reading this thread once in awhile, and haphazardly, when you actually do.

Despite the veritable encyclopedia that you have typed up in this thread... there seems to be no consensus between you and yourself as to your actual position on the issue.  You flitter all over the place on it and use 10,000 words to do it.  So excuse me for not excitedly consuming every bit of your prose without abatement.

I've already said I think we should abolish registration requirements.  Setting up a system of registered Atlasians and registered voters and blah blah blah is kinda dumb, considering we've already had this discussion a million times when people propose an "intent to register" list.  The registrar gets his knickers in a twist at the very mention of such a thing and it has been subsequently voted down because of it.

And yes... the "club" comments are melodramatic.  I'm only responding in kind to the melodramatic overblown "ZOMGZ DO YOU REMEMBER THE ZOMBIE INVASION!?  IT WAS SOOOOOOOOOOOOO BAD THAT I PRACTICALLY CRAPPED MY PANTS FOR 3 MONTHS STRAIGHT!  WE NEED TO MAKE THE REQUIREMENTS STRICTER!"

That just smacks of "I don't want you in the game.  I had to wait, so you should have to as well!"

I reject such notions out of hand.

[bgwah]

It also may be fair to suggest that since Dave has made Nym an administrator, some of the problems we faced earlier may now be taken care of at the administrative level.

[Rowan]

Requirements need to be higher and not lower and therefore I will vote against any bill that reduces requirements.

[tmthforu94]

So the question is, are we going to stick with original language and just overall lower the posting requirements, or amend it for pre-registration to occur?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think the Seattle-St. Paul axis made some good points. I don't think Libertas, Hamilton, Segway, Vane, True Liberty and company would have lasted half as long as they ended up doing, with Nym possessing a guillotine.


I would be more in favor of an overall lowering of the requirements if that options is paired against pre-registration. I don't think that pre-registration would provide the desired effects, but it would certainly guarrantee the extra effort of the RG as the price.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I agree with you on pre-registration. The cost far outweigh the benefits in this case.

[Junkie]

I agree with you on pre-registration. The cost far outweigh the benefits in this case.

I have been wondering about that.  Here are my thoughts.  Currently, we have a requirement that each voter must have posted I believe 25 votes in order for their votes to count in the election.  I think Kal's deletion bill also has screenshots.  All that would need to be done is to make sure that the voter has 75 votes (or whatever you decide) to vote.

It does get more complicated if you have some sort of registration limit, but if you allow everyone to register right away and just make it a vote count, it should not be that hard.  Other compilations due get to be a little more complicated.