Waterdeep elections

[Dalvyn]

If you do not know what I'm talking about ... then you need to spend some more time in game interacting with other characters !

First, some OOC words ... What does it mean to be elected a Lord of Waterdeep? It will mean that you will be part of a Council that will be empowered (1) to take various decisions about the laws of Waterdeep and (2) to represent Waterdeep officially.

Part #1 means that they will be able to determine who gets to enter in Waterdeep and who will be blocked by the guards (e.g., tieflings, orcs, ...), they will also get to determine how thefts, assaults, mob-killing and PC-killing will be punished by Honoria, they will be able to determine whether the anti-recall wards on the Square should be kept or not, they will be able to determine how trials are done in Waterdeep, how/if people from other cities can become citizens of Waterdeep, how/when new Lords are elected (or chosen or whatever), how/when Lords can be removed from their office, whether the MS guard should let people carry weapons, whether the laws apply to the Lords or not, who can cast magic in the streets of Waterdeep, and so on.

Part #2 means that, if there's a war between Hartsvale and Waterdeep, they get to represent Waterdeep; if a known Waterdhavian goes to Shadowdale, kills Mourngrym then flees to Waterdeep, they get to choose how to react; and so on.

At first, the system will be set like this: this Council of 3 elected members + 2 Watch members will resolve questions by voting; a simple majority of 3 votes on 5 will be enough to create/change/remove laws. (The Lords can decide that some laws are really important laws, call them constitution and vote that those constitution laws can only be created/modified/removed with 4/5 votes, or even 5/5 votes, or completely change the system afterwards).

No matter how the system is changed though, Lord Piergieron (OOCly the imms) will keep the power to veto any decision made by the Council. ICly, there's no explication given to that except that the wise Lord Piergieron wants to keep a hand in how things evolve and that he wants to be able to stop people from taking very bad decisions. OOCly, some decisions/laws might be impossible to implement, might conflict with the fact that Waterdeep is presented as a welcoming city for new players, might be completely opposed to the imms' vision of the mud. That's when this veto will be applied.

Who can be a candidate? It sounds reasonible to require that only citizens of Waterdeep can run for this election. "Citizen of Waterdeep" would mean that you see "Hometown: Waterdeep" when you type "score". Also, as an obvious restriction, each account can have at most one running candidate for Waterdeep.

Who can vote? Currently, the idea is that only citizens of Waterdeep can vote. That's very easy for me to build an area-based voting system where people could anonymously vote during, say, a 24 hour period. A system where you could only produce one vote per account though, would require a hard-code change.

Anyway, feel free to post OOC questions and suggestions here. Keep the IC questions/suggestions for the game though!

[Isaldur]

Do you think perhaps that not having it hard-coded would simulate the reasonable amount of corruption and liberty taking that a first time election would have? I'm not saying every player would abuse the honor system of one vote per account, but it is a way to justify through IC means..

Perhaps a level limit on who can vote to keep people from creating multiple Waterdhavians just to vote with?

I'll think more on it when I get some free time at work tonight, but this seems like a pretty difficult situation.

[Dalvyn]

Oh yes, definitely, either a minimum level, or a minimum amount of hours online.

[Isaldur]

Will there be any restrictions regarding accounts with strikes when it comes to voting or running?

Edit: Added more.

Will there be a cut-off period so if one character is doing poorly in the campaign that the player will not be able to drop out and immediately jump in as a different character? Or will this be allowed?

[Jaenoic]

How many votes will each character be alloted? Will it be only one, or more than one as there is more than one position being vied for?
Also, will those selected from the watch be appointed, or also elected like the others?

[Dalvyn]

No strike-based restriction on voting.

But I think we can reasonably require that only those with no strike can run for the elections.

There's no need for a cut-off period I think. We will set a day and time where all those who want to run for the elections should make themselves known. The election list will be made on that day/time and will not changed afterwards.

I'm not sure yet how many votes each citizen of Waterdeep will have. We can do one, or two, or three.

The two Watch Lords will not be chosen as part of the general voting process. One of them would/should (?) be the commanding officer (unless they want to be replaced by a representative). The commanding officer also determines how the second one is chosen (a vote amongst the Watch, or (s)he simply chooses him/her, or whatever).

[Lerytha]

There's a nice system of voting used for elections of this sort. Basically, if there is a list of names, you write the number of your preference next to the name, all the way till you've marked a number by every name. So, if Miriel was voting for a god, she'd put Mielikki as preference 1, Corellon 2, Mystra 3, Oghma 4, etc, etc.

This helps in an election with more than one winner, because it helps decide on combinations, easier.

Unless we just do a simple "vote once, once only" election. But then you have no way of deciding between a tie, or what to do if nobody has any votes. This way, someone will always have at least one vote (of whatever preference).

[Dalvyn]

Unless we just do a simple "vote once, once only" election. But then you have no way of deciding between a tie, or what to do if nobody has any votes. This way, someone will always have at least one vote (of whatever preference).

Erm ... how does it break ties if, for example, 50 out of 100 voters voted Dalvyn 1, Miriel 2 and the other 50 voters chose Miriel 1, Dalvyn 2?

[Horace]

With even numbered voters you can always have ties, with the system Lerytha suggested it's just way less likely.

[Maybel]

Your always #1 in my eyes Dalvyn

[Lerytha]

The possibility of two equal blocks of first and second preference votes tying between two individuals is extremely low. Just as the possibility of tying between two "first past the post" is extremely low. But... just so we're all aware, since its a MUD and its a very low-level election, we should be prepared for freak results. Or unusual situations. And I'm just trying to throw up some other, interesting ways of doing it rather than a simple "vote one" vote.

Especially because there's three "seats" as it were.

[Dalvyn]

How many candidates are there ? Last I heard, there were only 4 of them (which is the worst situation possible) ?

[Horace]

There's no real bad situation - just have Lord Piergeiron and the hidden lords decide however you want it to go down.

[Enig]

I don't know if it's still current but last time I did a head count we had seven candidates, not counting the two possible/known guard candidates.

No comment from me on the feasibility of any of the candidates swaying any votes at all

[Lerytha]

Is there any idea of what the system will be?

Will it be one, two, or three votes each?
Do we know when it will be held?

I must have read the previous posts wrong, because I've been "campaigning" based on people having three votes, but a second read shows that was never decided. So, just wondering if there's any developments here.

Thanks! (and I'm not pestering, don't worry!)

~Ol

[Glim]

Votes and who came in what position should be kept hidden after the election, no? It only really matters that so and so won, not that the 4th person only got like 10 votes or so, heh.

[Harroghty]

Glim, I believe your comment raises a cost-benefit analysis:

-You risk a loss of legitimacy for the elected individuals with less votes (it, conciously or not, could establish a hierarchy) by displaying the votes.

-You gain information about all the candidates that is beneficial for them and for future elections. Candidates are able to evaluate their efforts and citizens of Waterdeep are able to evaluate their choices and plan for future elections.

Overall, I believe the potential benefits are greater than the cost. The officials will work out their own issues between each other anyway; I don't believe that knowing Candidate A received more votes than Candidate B will be a real issue against the resolution of decisions between elected officials of equal authority. There is the chance of some kind of subconcious loss of self-worth on a candidate's part but I think we're bordering on the absurd to begin to play psychiatrist here. Cheers.

[Selveem]

Just out of curiosity, if a candidate is somehow slain.. does the candidate below them move up the ladder?