I like the new change, but I have just one comment on it: when I was GA, I used to do most of the work involving writing/editing scrolls, creating ceremonies/rituals etc offline. Then I'd come in, CTRL+V the text in the editor and voilà: a lot of work done in very little online time. Granted, it's not like that for all leadership tasks, I don't know if everyone does this and you can easily solve this by remaining online even though you write stuff in Notepad (isn't there something against being AFK?).

But anyways, I adore the idea of putting a subtle clue to each player's political influence in their HONOURS (but I guess I don't have much say in the matter since my vote weigh is only 5).

I'd go with 1-3 scale too, someone's vote being worth 10 times more than the other person's is somewhat disturbing.
But even with 1-10 scale, seems like a change for the better.

It is still a valid question.

Say it goes from 1 to 2 during the election. Is your vote worth 2 cause that what it was when it ended? or worth 1 because thats what it was when you voted.

I don't think that's really AFK in the strictest sense. I mean, you're still there. I write things in Works or Notepad while being logged in a lot. I'll have Lusternia up in the background where I can keep an eye on what's going on while I write and occasionally switch windows to say something or do something real quick if I need to. Usually do this in the library or my manse (so if you see me in those spots just sitting that's what I'm prolly doing! ).

To me, AFK is when you log your person in and then leave them sitting while you go do something else away from your computer. Clean the livingroom, cook food, etc.

Anyway, I like the change! I also like the idea of a subtle clue being in a person's Honors. Cause it does open up opportunities for political intrigue and so on.

I've been so busy over the holidays that I haven't been able to log in at all - my vote is prolly worth 1!

I hope your vote stays at where it was when the election opened, personally.

I like the new system, but I'll wait to the first election I can vote in to see if I still do.

One question though, are votes in referendums weighted now too?

I've done this before too. Part of it was because I could get guild work while I was sitting bored in my car waiting for my next job, but part of it was because I'm just plain more efficient where I don't have the game and the forums distracting me. It's a GM/GA quirk, though, and doesn't really apply to the rest of the playerbase.

You can just vote again if your weight went up and you care.

Actually, it should stay where it was when the election starts.

that way you don't have people becoming active for those 100 hours and altering thier weight just for that election.

Its not a question of revoting and having my weight change, its an issue of those alts who shouldn't be voting thats the issue.

Once an election opens, the weight of the people who can vote in that election should be frozen until its over.

I think this is a good system, but I agree wholeheartedly that the scale is a bit too wide. 1-3 or 1-5 would be more appropriate.

I think it's a bit more complicated than that, what about people who gain voting rights after it opens?

I imagine it will be "weight at the time the vote ends."

It's not like the weight will really change a whole lot if the person logs on for 4 days straight during the election, as it's based off of a 1-RL-month window (and people "logging on to influence a vote who don't play" aren't likely to spend anywhere near that much on anyways).

I like this change.

Somehow, I only got a 9..

*psst* Selling my 9 count vote for 25k or highest offer... (just kidding!)

I'm going to throw my hat in for the 1-3 system.

The 1-10 can sway elections WAAAY to much.

If 4 people with 10s vote for Person A, he gets 40 votes.
If 7 people with 5s vote for Person B, he gets 35 votes.

Now that's a rather rare situation, but we all get the picture.

With 1-3, it would more accuratly show the majority.
If the the B voters had 2 and the A 3, then B would have 14 and A 12.

There aren't many tens out there. I've been on what seems like tons (it's Wednesday and I have twenty hours logged this week) and I'm only a seven. I like the 1-5 better myself. If you're reasonably active, you should have a full vote.

I'm probably biased. But I like my 10.

While there's undeniably value in writing/editing helpfiles, writing rp rituals, etc., in the sense that Lusternia is a multiplayer game, I don't think it contributes as much to the game as, for example, a GM/GA who doesn't do those things, but spends that time logged into Lusternia interacting with their guild members instead. Your suggestion of being logged in while writing these things isn't a bad one, because at least then your guild members can approach you via tells if you're in your office and not secreted away in a manse.

If there ends up being an issue with people idling away their online time in a manse, then we can always discount time spent in a manse/docked aethership. I don't think it will come to that, though.

*insert obvious joke about "contributing" here*

In today's news, Lusternian top coder Morgfyre made a change to vote weighting that infuriated Lusternia's powerful mudsex lobby.

"Why should I have less of a say in my leadership for -my- contributions than someone who contributes in other ways," said NAME WITHHELD BY REQUEST. "I will fight this change to the ends of the earth. After an hour or so. Hey, um, could you leave for a while?"