Can there please be an option to switch referendums from vote weight to "1 vote per person"? I'd prefer if the default was set to the latter, but doesn't really matter as long as it's an option.

There are occasionally times when you want a referendum to just "count heads" of those who are for or against. For example, there's a Glomdoring policy that takes 5 yes voices on the Court to continue on something. The traditional way is to use a referendum. Unfortunately...

Choices:
1. (90) No
2. (37) Yes

This makes it hard to tell if there are 5 people who voted yes with low vote weight, or 3 people at 10 and one at 7 who did.

Vote weight is GREAT for elections, but really annoying when you just want a headcount of those who are for and against something.

I concur

Why not just add a display of the total number of people who voted for each proposal, as well as the total weight for each option?

EDIT: I thought something like that would be added soon anyways.

I understand what you're getting at, but the only problem would then be you could end up having the same problem vote weight is attempting to fix, where you get a buncha inactives trying to set things. And if you make it a toggle, then you might have people trying to end-run the new system by saying "weighted voting doesn't count".

What types of things are you trying to referredum? Maybe that can be used to determine if it's a valid thing to consider or if it goes against the spirit of the new setup.

Much agreement with Karnagan over this. No names though.

In clan-things, you can easily police this by doing CLAN MEMBERS DORMANT;CLAN DISCHARGE INACTIVE. In fact, for a Commune/City's ruling clan, I can't imagine that this isn't frequently done-- Glomdoring's, at least, strives to make sure that those who are in it are currently "active" (hold a guild position or a ministry). So... no, I don't see that being an issue in this case at all, and it's only an "issue" in other cases if you decide you want to do it by headcount instead of by voteweight... in which case it's not an issue at all, because that's what you decided.

I like the vote weight + total votes for referendums, which have no hardcoded effect from their results. Let each org/clan/whatever effect any rules as to which one matters.

For actual elections, no.

An idea'd be to make it so instead of the motion needing 5 votes from the Council to pass, you could require it to need at least x weighed vote points, or whatever they're called. I see the drawbacks of this though...

I also see the drawbacks, yes.

Hey five people, post yes or no?

Yeah... first of all, most people won't post even when asked to.

Second: Do you really want all the discussion posts interspersed with posts that say "Yes" or "No" as votes? That's a good way to add a lot of clutter and miss a few votes.

Not a great idea. Sorry.

It is an answer to the problem. Why should there be a referendum for five people?

or it could be

msg Kaervas No

Why shouldn't there? Why shouldn't there be a possibility to run a referendum looking for a headcount to see if there's a majority, not based on amount of time sitting around in the city? What's the point in reducing options and then saying, "Hey, you can 'get around it' by not using the referendums that we coded in specifically for these purposes."

Again-- not a great alternative. Referendums allow everyone to immediately see the results.

Why shouldnt there be? It is a waste of time to put for the effort to open a referendum for five people. Why shouldnt a person who is around more have more umph in their votes than those who are not. If random person isnt around to know what is going on, then why should their vote have the same footing as someone who is?

If it is a head counts that is needed, then have a head count not a referendum.

Yeees... except that's what much of a referendum is, a count of people. You should be able to have a choice between vote weight, or straight-out numbers, because there are times when you'll want straight-out numbers. Why exactly should my vote be worth 2 points more than Kaervas', for example, in a Court referendum discussing unenemying someone? That doesn't make sense.

I can think of a few situations when the activity level of a person wouldn't matter so much in a referendum, like if it was judging some entries in a contest. The opinion of a person who's around perhaps under an hour a day to check on the news and whatnot is still as meaningful of someone who logs 4 hours daily bashing. Now if it was an important policy decision then weightings would matter. Plus the anonymity granted by referendums is a great bonus.

Exactly. There are times when it'd be better to use one, times when it'd be better to use the other. I just believe that it should be an option to do it one way or the other, based on those times.

I see no reason why not to show both on referendums. Or at least have the option of one or the other while setting it up.

This is a good idea. If I hold a Talnara referendum about a design I don't give a damn about whether Aramel gets a 5 and Sarrasri gets an 8 or whatever, I just want a proper vote count.

Something like
1. A Talnara ring (87) (9 votes)
2. A Talnara necklace (64) (12 votes)

Would be nice, ONLY on referendums and ONLY if set beforehand. For elections it should obviously stay the same as it is.