Join the new world

I did it, and so can you!

I did it, and so can you! x2

Voted, takes a whole minute and everyone gets a vote.

But I didn't give a flyin' fig how it was decided. (Option needed.)

People are indeed entertaining. The f'ing house is burning down around them and all they can bitch about is what's on TV tonight. 😃😃

I think we care about what we're defending, in the end Pickle.

Love u bro.

Poll set up in my paper to show how each citizen can post it and it will feed to central database:

www.erepublik.com/en/article/2146494/1/20

again, the house burned down a long time ago. You kids are still playing with hobos under a bridge.

Oh thats the spirit Rick. Next thing you'll be voting AFA just because...it's easier than I dunno...hoping.

Poll set up in my paper to show how each citizen can post it and it will feed to central database:

http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-mbn-unity-in-more-than-name-right--2146114/1/20

clicked my vote, then a window popped up and asked me enter some kind of code. so I hit the x button

it asked for your profile ID. Honestly..people can switch parties to help out with ATO's, spend time concocting ways to make 6th parties move to theirs to have a say, Concoct ways to force citizens to either log on to that cesspool of a forum to have a vote, where some citizens are not allowed so they can't vote, but when it comes down to taking one minute of peoples time to ensure everyone has their fair say it's too much work.

I give up. You are right Rick. We are done. Fukitall.

Enjoy your farce of an "election" again. Grats Cerb.

Thanks Mike and Candor for trying to find a healthy compromise for as many citizens as possible. I really appreciate your efforts. Respect.

This is awesome!

Let's try and get it out there in addition to the primaries being run on party forums (we still need those discussions happening on the party level...let's do both this month and see how it matches up)

Also, I'm going to slap you guys for waiting until after my hand was forced to make a call on process to present this simple solution lol

Oh...question...how do you make it update more often so the results aren't hours old? Just curious.

@fingerguns

This was presented a month ago: http://eusaforums.com/forum/index.php/topic,21901.msg358027.html

To reload image you may have to do a hard refresh (ctrl-f5). That will ignore your browser cache and effectively re-download the image.

Wow, that was easy 🙂

Piece o' cake.

And Fingerguns, this was proposed before the last "unity" primaries were finished.

And you will be preventing AFA members for voting and skewing the vote for their opposition how?

I like it when Bia says "conCOKT".

But anyhoo, I can appreciate how everyone is pitching in here. Mike has proven to be quite handy with the techno stuff. (BTW, more than proud to have him as Pickle's Tech Officer.) Any positive effort to protect our country is a good thing.

I just personally feel that it is too late to save. I've already set in motion a plan to recover our country AFTER the PTO is completed. If that never happens then wonderful!

It was on the eusaforums so I didn't really see it lol I remember seeing it in some articles, but it didn't have allthe candidates listed and it never updated. I should've looked into it more. My bad!

Anyway, great work! I'd like to know more about this... I'll hit you up through PM

@Artela - If only offficial top 4 candidates are listed then AFA should not have any interest in even participating in the vote. But as a further deterrent I plan to implement a party affiliation check as well making it block votes from AFA members. But game mechanics make it super easy to switch parties so it won't be 100% AFA proof.

I believe it will be just enough trouble that there shouldn't be much of a problem with AFA members.

24 to 7...let's see that is 3 to 1 and widening against the method previously used...now if this were shouted by every candidate and their respective parties...if the vote was held in the WHPR...shouted by the DoD, the DoE, Homeland Security...etc...the turn out would be much higher...oh...and I am sure President 'Fluffer'...for the sake of Unity would not hinder his party from taking part....

Although I don't see hope in the system anymore, still I gotta praise Mike for working all this up, dude is real sweet with the gadgets!

Mike, the AFA's interest would be in voting for whoever they perceive to be the weakest of the candidates.

The massive potential for multi abuse is the only reason I don't support this. You have no way of screening multi votes, whereas forum polls do, and are equally as easy to run/participate in.

My only interest was in testing the method - it was easy to use. Appreciate the effort that went into it.

http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/just-wrong-2146405/1/20

"no way of screening multi votes, whereas forum polls do, and are equally as easy to run/participate in"

What this says is that in the forum, voting can be manipulated as well. How do you determine a multi? By comparing IP's? Because certainly those can be masked, and very often are, and not necessarily because the guys a baddie.

The thing here is, most people don't DO meta. Kinda the point of in game.

Any suggestions on screening multis? How would it be done in a forum poll?

There is a list of all player IDs that have cast a vote but no way of knowing who they have voted for.

Mike, just as a test, can you remove AFA member votes from the above poll so we can see how the results change?

The problem I see with the eusaforums idea is that it is forcing people to play the game that you want them to play, on your ground, rather then allowing them to play the game that they want to, erepublik, on their ground, erepublik. This method circumvents that, and while not perfect, is pretty good. I guess the real question is if the status quo folks in power are willing to relinquish a little bit of their control in the interest of a more democratic process. I'm guessing that they won't.

😁^ You get it, nearly exactly.

But I would emphasize the involvement of non-meta (the majority), and downplay the (while true) status quo folks giving up a bit of power. Both are true imo, but the first far more important to the nation's long term health than the latter, on balance.

"just as a test, can you remove AFA member votes from the above poll so we can see how the results change?"

fg, the test results can't be played with, it's impossible. That said, i know he was working on a program to exclude AFA members to begin with, but that probably isn't possible either.

But in a Vote of four loyal candidates, to what advantage would the AFA involve itself? They are four people WE chose in Primary elections. Theoretically, all safe and secure choices, right?

Alright, I voted. Now if something breaks, you know who to blame.

Candor, again if there are 4 loyal candidates it will not be because parties were FORCED to candidate someone, regardless of interest or experience. Get it out of your head. It will never happen that way.

Thanks for the other info, though. I'll work with Mike on this.

We need something that's going to be as legit and hard to manipulate as possible. It doesn't look like we'll NEED it for this election, but we can't go through this every month. We need something long-term.

" It will never happen that way."

I hope that isn't true, taking away the ability to choose from a selection of choices is a pretty darn good way to squash democracy. Seriously, this is how most dictatorships in reallife hold power: They hold popular elections, lol, but there is only ONE choice!

Some even brag about 90% turn outs for that one guy! 🙂

Anyway, at least to mirror eRep non-meta (non Unity) elections, there had better always be two or three choices.

Don't be dense. Yeah two or three choices would be great. But what you keep talking about is REQUIRING that party's put someone up for CP.

That's stupid.

CP elections is not the time for partisanship. I'll fight you on that point as hard as I need to.

Now it sounds like you're saying that you oppose a Unity candidate, in general...is that the case?

"dense", and "that's stupid".

Have I been unkind fg? I appologize if so.

I agree we need a "Unity" candidate. The election of which should mirror the mechanical one as much as possible, with multiple choices, and a popular vote.

And I will fight for a popular vote each and every month as well, it's a core value I believe in, and the value to the nation of inclusion and confidence in the system is a long term national security concern, in my obvious (I hope) opinion.

Like all VOLUNTARY POLLS this one will be biased to those that care the most. The only true way to conduct a poll is to structure it and account for non-responses, something that cannot be done in this manner.

Although I applaud your efforts to get people thinking. That's probably the best effect of doing this. But those that are apathetic won't vote when in reality they might just be accepting of the status quo...

^ Watch them twins boy.

It is always nice to see people programming eR for a change. I just found out my remote bot had 2 GB of error logs because I didn't turn it off. My bad, turned it of today. Does OAuth not work anymore? I'm with PigInZen on this one, you have no way of making 2clickers click on anything other than 2click.

I could see non-response error being a problem with any poll conducted in this game. I'm sure that even the game mechanics elections have this problem.

Do you have any suggestions to fix or help this issue?

Wait what? 4-to-1 against last months system and yet this is the system they're using?

Um, look up top here. Here's the system people prefer. It works. It's inclusive. It's unbreakable, it's secure and can't be tampered with. People needn't join the forums.

not gonna even bother putting a vote

You have a sample of 30 people, Candor. Good job.

It is now at 42 - 14 that is a 3 -1 margin and yet this method is being discarded. Once again if this method to chose the Unity Candidate is not used and Fluffer or his hand picked failure is ran, you will push 3 out 4 citizens into the AFA.

"You have a sample of 30 people, Candor. Good job."

It's twice that (60), and in a paper with less than 236 subscribers Pfeiff.

And I bet this is a better turn out than the USWP Primary, am I right?

1. RGR STFU and leave my RL children out of your comments.

2. The only way to counter voluntary & non-response bias is to design a poll by traditional means. Send it out privately, track responses and non-responses and account for bias. Publish the MOE & confidence.

And 46 votes in a voluntary poll is not sound, Candor. Give it up, man, you're smarter than this.

I'm not saying the author & sponsors don't have a point, but this proves nothing.

Almost 60 votes from just 3 small time articles for a pretty much meaningless poll is pretty good I say.

Just imagine if the government got behind this. The polling system could be in every article of the top 5.

If every article in the top 5 was exactly the same would that not get a lot of peoples attention?
http://ereptools.tk/images/top5same.png

Our point is simple: We CAN have a popular vote, and here's how. Right here.

As Mike says, put this in a wide variety of articles, you have a serious return. All the articles tie to the same results.