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

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Look, this isn't anything new...whichever party or group has inactive officeholders is going to duck and dodge claims that it matters, attempt to splice any data-points provided by claiming exceptions and disagreements in how it is presented, and even ultimately try to portray themselves as victims who are being unfairly criticized; everyone else is going to have a problem with it. Get over it.

Don't try to dress inactivity up as some sort of noble achievement or otherwise excuse it because you like the person, and surely don't try to paint yourself as a victim. This game doesn't work when people don't show up - period. The notion that if you call this sort of stuff out that people won't want to play anymore is akin to saying that a tree will die if a strong storm blows through and knocks off all the dead branches. There will always be others who are willing to do the job diligence waiting in the wings.

I wonder how my campaign would go if I promised to vote just half the time - would that be an issue for anyone? It's really embarrassing to watch people get up-in-arms about a simple set of scores being posted to the forum.

You're the last person in Atlasia who should be accusing people of trying to make themselves out to be victims. 

[Adam Griffin]

Look, this isn't anything new...whichever party or group has inactive officeholders is going to duck and dodge claims that it matters, attempt to splice any data-points provided by claiming exceptions and disagreements in how it is presented, and even ultimately try to portray themselves as victims who are being unfairly criticized; everyone else is going to have a problem with it. Get over it.

Don't try to dress inactivity up as some sort of noble achievement or otherwise excuse it because you like the person, and surely don't try to paint yourself as a victim. This game doesn't work when people don't show up - period. The notion that if you call this sort of stuff out that people won't want to play anymore is akin to saying that a tree will die if a strong storm blows through and knocks off all the dead branches. There will always be others who are willing to do the job diligence waiting in the wings.

I wonder how my campaign would go if I promised to vote just half the time - would that be an issue for anyone? It's really embarrassing to watch people get up-in-arms about a simple set of scores being posted to the forum.

You're the last person in Atlasia who should be accusing people of trying to make themselves out to be victims. 

I know you've been wanting to argue with me as of late, but I'm simply going to have to forfeit the opportunity like you did multiple Senate tenures, seeing as how I wouldn't possibly know which X I'd be debating beforehand!

[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 .

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

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

See... and people say I talk too much

[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!

[Senator Cris]

Statistics about the 65th Senate (from January 2 to March 6)

If a Senator missed a vote during a period in which there was a LOA, I have not counted this vote as a missed vote.

[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

[free my dawg]

*Please, tell me *how* I have attacked Polnut on this forum. I just posted a score that was saying how many votes every senator has missed in February.
* I never said my tracker didn't need to be improved. I just don't understand the tantrum you and some friends launched. I mean, in order to measure activity, one of the first things to do is to determine how many votes were missed. I was going to post some other things, like how many amendments have been introduced etc.
* You want to talk about Bacon king. You're still angry by my AYE vote for his automatic impeachment trial? I don't regret it. He hasn't posted a LOA, he needed to be impeached. And considering how active he is, I was just right.

*It's less of Polnut, but I'm not enthused with you guys attacking my party (and the comments you made yesterday afternoon on IRC). While Griffin was admittedly more tame in this, I feel as if some of your comments were hyperbolic at best and vitriolic at worst. You named quite a few there with inactivity issues, but you have to remember that Polnut is one of the few people who is actually making it in the political world. He's not some guy playing Smash Bros. all day and posting about how the left shall rise again. We all have real lives - two of the six you and Griffin mentioned had valid LOAs, one hasn't held office for a year, and the "member" who Griffin mentioned as inactive wasn't even a member of the party when he went on his inactivity spree and was only a member for two weeks. Hell, I'm sure Griffin would be inactive too if a big opportunity came up and there was an opening to run against David Perdue or whoever they run for Governor. I'll admit, you have the two others down, but trying to lump people like Matt and Polnut in with BK is just wrong.

But enough of trying to bite back. Outside of the Senate, we've actually been fairly active. Our coalition has made the Northeast the most active region in the game, and we've managed to successfully revitalize the South as well. Turkisblau is doing wonders in the Pacific, and I eagerly await Intell's replacement. It's also worth noting that one of the best newspaper editors (and advocates for you), and many other great representatives, are running for Assembly, so it seems as if inactivity isn't exactly a plague.

*You'll have to forgive me. I'm not a fan of broad-based attacks on my party. Just like I expected Griffin to come after me for attacking this tracker, it's natural for me as one of the public faces of TPP to defend my party when people are calling us a party of inactivity. Like I said, we've been very active at the regional level, and we've revived one region and are working on reviving another. We can all agree that our coalition helped smash SirNick's partisan gridlock, and through me, Matt, and Griffin's leadership, we've restored peace to the Northeast. It's also worth noting that the reason why Matt let Blair take the Speakership is because he knew his personal problems wouldn't make him active enough to be Speaker. He can't participate in much debate, but he's on a temporary LOA because of said problems.

*I'm not entirely angry about the situation with BK. In fact, I just said he had legitimate activity issues this time around. But in the past, he had valid excuses that shouldn't have had people going after him for because he didn't post a leave. You can go after him all you want on his current issue, but I don't personally consider not posting a leave during the holidays a big deal. I thought it'd be understood that Thanksgiving was a busy time.

Oh yeah, and thanks for putting more information in the tracker. It's a very good start.

[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).

[free my dawg]

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).

How does that excuse you saying that someone who's only there for the vote is better than "Mr 36%" again? Especially when Polnut has literally managed to put more into debate in half the time? And how does that excuses the fact that when I called you out on holding grudges, you made a red herring about how I falsely accused you of referring to the incident in 2012 (even though I made it clear a while back that I understood you werent)?

I'm just saying, take a step back from the keyboard and scale back a bit if you're getting this worked up over the past. Removing some of my emotional investment did a hell of a lot for me.

[Adam Griffin]

Are we really going to start citing IRC commentary on the forum on a regular basis? Do I need to publish the convo in question so we can all be aware of what was said?

This had all calmed down until you posted a 500-word dissertation (presumably free of any emotional investment), sawx, and now you're going after windjammer (and me again?) by using what I am from here on out going to refer as "windjamming" (where fingers are jammed into the wind in an attempt to discredit someone based on a perceived weakness or character flaw that is not currently applicable; very comparable to gaslighting and/or the tactic that Fox uses to tell perfectly calm guests to "calm down").


Statistics are not controversial by nature. Windjammer has made it clear that he's going to keep posting them along with Cris, as they originally intended. I've advise everyone who doesn't like what a particular set of stats have to say to do what I do and not acknowledge them, rather than getting all up in arms about it each time a new set of them is released showing something that isn't liked.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I am glad you have restored the amendment tracker. I have not had time since December to catch back up once I fell behind again from moving. Ironically, I kept up when I didn't have internet access or at least didn't fall behind enough so that I wasn't able to catch up.

One of my biggest areas of disatisfaction with myself was not offering as many amendments as I used to and at the same time posting suggestions or ideas that other people offered as amendments. I used to do this all the time, but back then the volume of my amendments were such that it didn't matter. I think my word count bares that out. Considering how limited my time has been, just immagine how my numbers must have dwarfed everyone else's back in say July.

Please, please please Windjammer, do July's word count. I got to see it, now.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I must say that I applaud the word counts of debate. I believe that the role of a Senator is not only to vote, but also discuss the merits of bills before the Senate. For me, the ideal Senator must vote and discuss.

[free my dawg]

Are we really going to start citing IRC commentary on the forum on a regular basis? Do I need to publish the convo in question so we can all be aware of what was said?

This had all calmed down until you posted a 500-word dissertation (presumably free of any emotional investment), sawx, and now you're going after windjammer (and me again?) by using what I am from here on out going to refer as "windjamming" (where fingers are jammed into the wind in an attempt to discredit someone based on a perceived weakness or character flaw that is not currently applicable; very comparable to gaslighting and/or the tactic that Fox uses to tell perfectly calm guests to "calm down").

Yes, we are, because windjammer straight up jammed the wind himself. Nothing was ever said about Labor as a whole - the closest quote was something to the effect of "I can't believe people are electing this guy". Windjammer's allegations of what was actually said are true - I won't deny the actual truth of what happened, but most of the vitriol was targeted at one person. I simply stepped in because of some foolish bullsh*t, that admittedly wasn't a red herring. That comment about his mental health? Not good - he has a right to hold a grudge over what I said, and for that, windjammer, I'm sorry.

As for the attacking? The worst that was said about Polnut's inactivity was just that - he was inactive. I was being hyperbolic. Other potshots were taken. And guess what? All of that is fine. If you've got the data, put it out. However, where I draw the line is when members of your party start attacking my party as a whole. Not its candidates, not its members, but the entire party. As I've said before, we've been very active outside of the Senate, and it's insulting to me, the work that I (and others in the party) have done (for example: recruiting one of windjammer's best advocates), and my fellow members. Who recruited Turkisblau, who's trying to revitalize the Pacific, as Flo has done with the IDS? That was me. Who gave windjammer Harry S. Truman and MormDem, two unapologetic supporters of windjammer? That was Flo. I've had some duds, but you can't deny we're the most active party on the regional level. So yes - I am angry that windjammer said TPP's members have activity problems, because it's simply not true (especially considering one of them is actually on a semi-LOA and one of them has not held office for a long while).

I've been nice, but considering you've taken off the gloves, I guess I'll take off mine. If your party member had decided to make this about our actual candidates instead of trying to take potshots at us as a unit, I would have simply apologized for what I've done, admitted my wrongs, and this would not be a controversy. However, he made these comments, I've made my dissertations, and you've somehow managed to defend the fact that he literally attacked another coalition partner. That's put a knot in the coalition that we've worked hard to build, and I will warn anyone in your party one last time: Cease the attacks on my party or I'm out.

[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.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Can we please leave the IRC crap out of this forum?

Seriously, it serves no purpose but to inflame.

[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 .

[free my dawg]

You know what? Considering you're clearly holding a grudge against me for it (and you're attacking me for something that I literally just apologized and admitted I was wrong for) , and you're now straight up lying about me, this debate is over.

[Poirot]

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.

[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.

[Senator Cris]

Here we go!

[Simfan34]

Who recruited Turkisblau, who's trying to revitalize the Pacific, as Flo has done with the IDS? That was me.

I appreciate the appreciation.

[Maxwell]

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