Alternative RA size proposal

[Beathan]

Just spitballing an idea here -- I don't claim to have thought this through --

The RA shall be equal to the number of sims + the number of official factions, if an odd number, or the number of sims + the number of factions +1 otherwise. (Alternatively, we can make the Chancellor the Chair of the RA with no vote other than a tie-breaking vote, much as the Vice President chairs the US Senate.)

Each citizen shall identify his/her/itself as a citizen of a CDS sim in which that citizen owns land. If a citizen owns land in more than one sim, the citizen is to choose one sim as their sim of residence."

Each sim shall have one RA representative, who shall be run individually and who shall be elected by the STV method -- single transferable vote -- of voting sim citizens. Further, additional RA seats shall be filled based on factional voting using the borda count method. Factions are to fill their seats within two weeks of certification of the election. If a faction has not identified faction members to fill all won seats, the unfilled seats shall be forfeit and shall revert to the faction that received the next highest borda count, in an iterative process, until all seats are filled. If there are unfilled seats at the conclusion of this process, the Chancellor shall appoint a citizen to fill any such unfilled seats.

This proposal is a wee bit complicated, but it covers the waterfront of past and current proposals, I think. It also addresses RA size and addresses local representation. I am also considering proposing that sims set up some local governance and participation meetings, on Jon's New England model, set up and run by the local representative. This would let us try Jon's experiment without disrupting our larger project -- although, if that model works very well, we can incorporate it upstream as well.

Beathan

[Salzie Sachertorte]

I like this idea as it allows the RA to grow with the CDS. I do see a problem in this in that choice of a person's residency sim could lead to all sorts of political manuevering. Perhaps a better a way to establish residency would be to consider an citizen a resident within the sim he or she hold the most land in, to be determined on the same date as that in which residency is determined before an election. However, each citizen owning land within a sim could participate in the local counsel (or whaterever) for that sim.

I'm not sure your other suggestion, as I never quite understood Borda accounts and the like.

[Beathan]

Salzi --

I like your amendment, but I would need to hear about the mechanics of making the determination and what to do in cases of a tie. Thanks.

Beathan

[Brian Livingston]

Perhaps in the event of a tie, the primary sim of residence could be the sim in which the citizen has continuously held land the longest.

--BL

[Flyingroc Chung]

There's some fairness problems to consider here, let's say one sim has 10 residents, and another 30. The 10 residents of one sim get 1 representative, and the 30 residents get another.This also mean that, assuming we dont have any more factions created) we won't really substantially change the number of RA members (still 7) until we add another sim. And when we add that sim, we will probably have just about as many RA members (9) as the current constitution mandates (except, we might get 9 Ra members earlier than later, depending on the timing of when the sim actually comes online). So if there is a fundamental problem with the current size of the RA, this bill will not solve it. If there is a problem with how the size of the RA grows, this proposal will probably not affect it either until after we add 2 more regions.

There is also a problem of faction proliferation. Under this proposal, the easiest way to get a disproportionate voice into the RA is to form a faction of 3. Because the number of seats grow with the number of factions, the borda count + st. lague method virtually guarantees a seat for every faction. Thus if the aim is to limit the number of RA seats, this proposal will not solve it.

It seems to me that this proposal aims to change the composition, rather than the size of the RA.

so here's a couple of questions:

1. Is there a fundamental problem with the size of the RA? Is 7 too big for a community of 70?
2. Is there a problem with the composition of the RA? Is faction-based representation less fair than region-based representation, or a mixture of both?

[Bromo Ivory]

Limiting RA size, I think, won't solve the problem of members of the RA fighting and bickering. It may make it easier to maintain order, but it won't end rancor. The root of the current problem is in the control of the agenda residing in a person selected by fiat rather than from the RA. I think we can propose all kinds of new systems, but failing to address the LRA selection and agenda control will keep the root of the matter alive and well. It may go away for a bit, but will come back later, and likely larger.

[Patroklus Murakami]

The root of the current problem is in the control of the agenda residing in a person selected by fiat rather than from the RA.

The LRA is elected by the people, not by 'fiat'. As the candidate with the highest personal preference from the faction with the highest score with the voters, the LRA is entitled to set the agenda. Elsewhere I have proposed measures to share that power with the RA to prevent abuse. But let's be clear about what we're changing. The LRA is elected by the voters, they decide.

[Beathan]

Pat --

There is no reasonable sense in which it can be said that the LRA is elected by the people. The LRA is the person holding a part leadership position in a popular party. However, unless there is an indentity between a party and its leader (which has not been true since Michel left CARE), a vote for a party is not a vote for its leader.

FR --

I am not sure that I agree that my proposal is unfair. All citizens have equal say in electing the at large reps. Further, each sim costs the same, regardless of how populous it is, so sim specific reps are proportional not to a "head count" but to financial investment in the CDS. This does not seem unfair, even though it is not the traditional head count democracy.

Bromo --

I agree that limiting RA size will not end the personality conflicts. This proposal -- which is speculative and which I am not yet advocating, only exploring -- is not offered as an alternative to my RA procedures bill. We don't live in a magical wonderland where everyone gets along. It is wrong and undemocratic to overcome the problems of disagreement and conflict by stifling them by empowering one participant over the others. We need rules of procedure, just as iRL, to solve this problem. RRO is the best candidate that has been offered.

However, I think that there is good reason to limit the RA size to something that makes more sense. Given our spaces, it does not seem reasonable to fit an RA of forty anywhere. However, if we had -- say -- 30 sims and 10 factions, we could have an entire sim dedicated to the seat of government which could fit 40 reps. We would have the rent to support it. Thus, I think that the idea of linking RA size to land amount rather than population makes sense.

Beathan

[Jon Seattle]

Beathan,

The UNHCR requires "equal suffrage" which I take to mean one person - one vote. Would that also be repealed with this proposal?

[Patroklus Murakami]

Beathan -

The LRA comes from the faction with the highest Borda count - who determines that? The people! Is it any old candidate from the most popular faction? No, it's the one with the highest personal Borda count - who determines that? The people who put that faction first in their list.

I'll grant you that the LRA is not *directly* elected by the people but it is clear to me that the leading faction has a mandate given them by the electorate. Part of that mandate involves setting the agenda, with some limits as proposed elsewhere.

Can you at least agree with me, since I was replying to Bromo, that it is inaccurate to say that the LRA is 'selected by fiat'?

[Beathan]

Beathan,

The UNHCR requires "equal suffrage" which I take to mean one person - one vote. Would that also be repealed with this proposal?

Jon -- good point, and I think this can be seen as a problem, but I think that, technically, this does preserve equal suffrage. The at-large positions are elected by equal suffrage throughout the CDS. The sim-specific positions are elected by equal suffrage throughout the sim that elects them. Further, because the sim-specific positions have a sim-specific role (as chair of the sim townhalls), it makes sense that they would be elected by sim residents only.

Equal suffrage, as a concept, does not tell us the level at which suffrage occur; it just mandates that, whatever level is voting, that votes are weightede equally. For this reason, even though the US Senate is elected with two Senators per state, the process does not violate the UDHR (although, interestingly, it would violate the "Republican Form of Government" mandate of the US Constitution if it were not itself Constitutionally mandated).

I'm not sure that my proposal is good policy -- but I think that it meets technical muster under the UDHR.

Pat --

Yes, I can agree with you that "fiat" is too strong a word. Rather, the LRA is undemocratically selected by the Party with the greatest borda count. The selection process is soviet, in the technical use of the word "soviet" - meaning rule by an internally selected party leader rather than by a democratically selected leader. In fact, I don't think that it is even fair to say that the LRA is selected by indirect democratic process -- as the LRA would be if, for instance, he or she were elected by the RA from its own membership. Rather, the position of LRA is outside the general popular control, and within the sole control of a party. I think that this is an irresponsible and undemocratic delegation of the selction of a critical public office from the people and their representatives to a single faction. In fact, I would go so far as to say that our current selection of the LRA denies equal suffrage far more and more obviously than allowing sim-specific suffrage.

Beathan