[Congress] End of term report.
Day 4,086, 01:35
•
Published in Netherlands 
•
by
•
by Tim Veltkamp
Good Day eNetherlands!
So here we are at the end of the January Congress term for 2019.
This will be a general summary if you wish to have a closer look yourself feel free to do so here.
Participation in votes have been pretty high, with the in-game PM votes having 85.7%
and in-game votes having 76.5%.
Specifically for the in-game PM there has been one debate which has resulted in 1 vote that they have voted on. With the turnout reaching 85.7%.
In total there were 17 Congress members that reached 100% in their participation. With 3
Congress members being under 25%.
Overall party activity:
ReL: 80%
DemNL: 100%
VN: 100%
I&W: 80%
GPN: 0%
Now onto in-game votes. Obviously there is less info for these since only the individual members know what they have voted on and for/against.
There have been a total of 14 votes in-game, resulting in 95.2% for the highest turnout and 66.7% for the lowest.
So here we are at the end of the January Congress term for 2019.
This will be a general summary if you wish to have a closer look yourself feel free to do so here.
Participation in votes have been pretty high, with the in-game PM votes having 85.7%
and in-game votes having 76.5%.Specifically for the in-game PM there has been one debate which has resulted in 1 vote that they have voted on. With the turnout reaching 85.7%
.In total there were 17
Congress members that reached 100% in their participation. With 3 Congress members being under 25%.Overall party activity:
ReL: 80%
DemNL: 100%
VN: 100%
I&W: 80%
GPN: 0%
Now onto in-game votes. Obviously there is less info for these since only the individual members know what they have voted on and for/against.
There have been a total of 14 votes in-game, resulting in 95.2%
for the highest turnout and 66.7% for the lowest.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Lovely Tim! I like these articles of yours!
"Now onto in-game votes. Obviously there is less info for these since only the individual members know what they have voted on and for/against."
Indeed, which, once again, shows strange stats as there seems to be a constant No amount of votes even on issues we all seem to agree on or at least know we should vote yes on. I mean we have an obligation towards Iran so voting No can only be due to CM ignoring that for whatever reason and putting an agreement on danger that benefits NL largely. As pointed out before that seems to point to a certain group of players. Without proof naturally, yet hardly a coincidence I fear.
I guess we could make these in-game votes public if requested by the public
How would you suggest making it public?
I also thought he meant the in-game vote's that replaced the forum votes at first. However it are the votes casted on in-game proposals. It would require a law to force people to also mention somewhere what they voted and I'm 100% sure it will not work as people will either not mention it or mention different voting behaviour. Especially on matters like MPP and donations to Iran.
easy no? CoC makes the vote PM for a law... maybe once or twice a month the CoC will publish the (bi)monthly report including the way people voted in the in-game PM.... it's not that hard.
Sorry for fast replying without reading carefully first 😕
We can also create an in-game PM vote for the vote in administration area.
Every CM casts his vote and also mentions what he voted in the PM.
@Shawtyl0w
That would solve literally nothing, as people would simply ignore it, or worse, lied about their vote to make themselves look good 😉 .
Also, why doubling the voting requirements by need to do your vote by both in-game button and in-game PM, that's just extra layer of pointless bureaucracy.
Well if 80% of voters say "vote 4-1 (yes)" "vote 5-1 (yes)" it is pretty easy to determine which cm is lieing and which cm is simply hiding. it's double voteing yes. That's why I said if public asks for it. However I don't really see the need to know who voted what as long as eNL keeps its word and follows binding agreements.
I agree it would be simple Shawtyl0w. If only people would be honest about their votes.
It would also show who doesn't vote at all since there have been plenty of those. But it does create another layer of voting in essence and people would just lie and blame others potentially causing even bigger issues. As of right now, there isn't a big enough number to even get close to rejecting a proposal, so unless it were to increase I personally wouldn't go through all the hassle.
You could always ask them to send you a SS (it's been a while, but I seem to remember there is a way to know what you voted based on the SS), but it seems like a lot of trouble anyway, there will always be rogue voters in MPPs/Donations
Once again throwing out suggestion to name the article "Congress Activity Report" (which it is) instead of "End of Term Report" (which it is not) 😉
Well, it is the end of term for previous congress. I suppose he means that. At least I would not know which other term it could be he means.
The original title of this article way back when was "Congress member activity sheet (October 201😎", which I simply see more fitting for this type of article. But I understand the subtle political importance to trademark "End of term report." 😉
Yeah it is just the end of the congress term hence the [congress] end of term report. The original title was quite long and honestly is it going to make a difference whether it is called activity sheet or report? I mean it's not like we have 50 congress articles publishing at once on the 26/27th causing confusion. If it does get to that stage i'll happily change the title.