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

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Yeah, 7 days is a bit early.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I'm not supporting any lowering of registration requirement, compromise or not compromise.

I'd be fine with 2 weeks and 50 posts, but I agree it may allow people to manipulate the system. However, people will always find a way to manipulate the system regardless of its rules.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

It's thirsty Thursday. Where do you think the sponsor is?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Perhaps if you drank more often, you'd chill out.

But where is Happy? He's posted in other threads. Perhaps he forgot he sponsored this bill?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

What's the current incarnation of this bill? 10 days and 50 posts?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I can be bought off for 10 days and fifty posts. What is the current requirement? 75 posts and 7 days? I, too, want to make sure we don't make it so easy that a zombie machine can rise up again, because we've seen what that can do longterm in places like the NE. That said, we can't discourage people either. 10 days and 50 posts, 5 posts a day, seems reasonable enough to me.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

What about 50 posts and 15 days? Encourages less spam and still makes new users wait two weeks before signing up?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

What about 50 posts and 15 days? Encourages less spam and still makes new users wait two weeks before signing up?

If 10 can't get passed, I'd at least like to see 14, since I think that's easier to figure.

Okay. Would anyone drop it to 14 and be okay with that? And 50 posts? What's a day amongst friends?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I think 10 days is the best amount - It's easiest to count from when someone registered.

I think 14 days, or 2 weeks, is much easier to count

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

What would I vote nay on? Are we voting on an amendment? Can I amend to the following:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

We aren't voting on anything right now. Antonio is just buying votes.

I never got a check from him.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

We aren't voting on anything right now. Antonio is just buying votes.

I never got a check from him.

Want one ? I'm taking example from my PM there...

Reelection is 4 months away. It's never too early to start taking donations.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Stop screwing us at the ballot box and maybe we will

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

If people want to cut the days to 10, then so be it. Forget my amendment.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Eighteen days? Why can't it be 2 weeks? It'll be so simple!

Nay

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Two weeks and 50 posts is an easy number to remember. I don't know why 10 days or 18 days and the like is even being thrown around!

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Activity for the sake of activity isn't always good. It's hard to argue Hamilton effected the game in a positive way. His actions, while they did bring attention due to the sheer ridiculousness, would eventually have torn the game apart.

I still want an amendment for 2 weeks. I'm not sold on reducing it to 10 days quite yet.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I think the argument can be made that for the longevity of the game, we need solid requirements in place. For example: we lower the limit and suddenly we have tons of people signing up, posting for a few days, and then leaving. I think to an extend, it is important we do have a way to ensure members who sign up to play sign up for the right reasons, and they are members that actually plan to stick around and even participate !

This isn't a left/right issue. It's more of a divide between those who want a more open community and those who want a higher quality community. We've seen in the past that massive recruitment drives leads to deadweight losses and little activity. The byproducts of gaming the system are beginning to rear its ugly head in the shrinking voter rolls, low election turnout, and inactivity in certain regions that will not be named.

I'm in favor of dropping the number of posts required to join, but I do think the member needs to be around the forum for 2 weeks at minimum before it can decide whether he is in for the long haul and wishes to join this game.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Frankly I don't care who's more friendly to new members. I only care about the problems that it might cause if we lower the number of days to 5 or 10. We want people who will be worth a damn in this game, not people to register on impulse. I think this is an Atlasian issue.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I don't know how i feel about eliminating the post requirement altogether.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

My only concern with eliminating the post requirement completely is, we'll have more and more members join and subsequently leave, as well as the possibility someone could simply get all his friends to join, wait two weeks, and have them vote in elections with 1-2 posts to their name. I think 50 posts over 2 weeks, something like 3.5 posts per day, is very fair for someone to meet. Making 3 thoughtful posts a day isn't asking too much from new members. While I understand what the President wants to do with this bill, we must understand that people will inevitably exploit this and our game will suffer from mass delusion. I think the step from 75 -> 50 is a good one, but not from 75 -> 0.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Fair enough, but then we'd just create more work for our RG. I think asking new members to make 50 posts over a spanish of 2 weeks is reasonable. 50:14 or fight!

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Nay - you know my stance already.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I feel like this will just create unnecessary confusion. Is it really a big deal to be registered but not be allowed to vote? I mean, you post in the new register thread that you live in a state and then what? You're free to participate in discussion whether you're registered or not. I'm not sure what this does except to make a nightmare for all of us. I can't imagine Yankee and myself having to figure out who is eligible to vote each time we have an election.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

But what's the point? If this bill passes, not only do we have to figure out if someone is eligible with activity, but now we have to go through post counts.

Again, what does this bill do besides creating headaches for people involved? What benefit does someone have who registers and cannot vote? Voting and running is why we register. There's no other reason.