[Gen. Slim] Rant on Elections
Day 1,875, 12:47
•
Published in United Kingdom 
•
by
•
by General Slim
**Please Note** This article was written on day 1873. I do not publish it because top 5 articles had like 200+ votes each.
Firstly, I would like to congratulate Big Ant on his reelection, it was a close and exciting race.
Secondly, here is my rant on the election. As usual, take it wait a pinch of salt.
Vote Buying
I've discussed this before, and I feel as if I should discuss it again.
Vote buying is a large problem here in the eUK. Since I've first joined the eUK, I've often seen articles in the top 5 that don't belong there. I'm sure this annoys us all. Since this is a universal petpeev, I don't think I have to elaborate on it.
But, I will elaborate on vote buying during campaign season. I have no problem with candidates and their supporters writing articles promoting themselves. I do have a problem when they start buying votes for these articles. Here is why:
-Money spent on articles could have been spent bettering our nation. Instead, they it is being sent overseas.
-High quality articles are blocked from the top 5 (or forced have votes bought for them)
-And most importantly, it unfairly sways voters. Nowadays, it seems as if instead of the best man (or women) for the job getting elected, the candidate with the most money is getting elected. Instead of candidates spending their time proving to the people they are worthy to serve, they are to busy competing with their opposition for control of the top 5 with lousy articles.
Currently, all of the articles in the top 5 were bought with votes, (as of 17:23 day 1873) and in the past few days, several articles were published supporting a candidate. Here are the top 10 articles (at the time this article was written, 17:23 day 1873)
I can buy votes too! An excellent piece of satire. Can't really complain much about this article. I guess there is always an exception to the rule.
[ALFA]This is my Cabinet I guess you could call it political humor. I honestly believe that votes should not have been bought for this article.
[1V] Supply Notice Just another MU promoting it's self at the expense of others. Mega votes bought for an article that virtually nobody cares about.
[Thomas] Day 1872, foreign affairs A high quality article that deserves to be in the top 5. Unfortunately, votes had to be bought to get it there.
A Rookie An article written by a youngster just trying to help. I feel bad saying this, but his article is not top 5 worthy. If your are a youngster like him and want to make a difference, find a way to get involved. I recommend the ambassador program (if it will be run right this term). It is a great way to learn about the eWorld and get your name out there.
[ESO] Eat Some Omelette: Grab your free things! Eh. At least their article is benefiting the people more than they are benefiting themselves.
[BA] - This is it - The Cabinet BA buying votes to promote himself.
[Beta] My Cabinet! Beta buying votes to promote himself.
We Support BigAnt This article is the most devious of them all. They lured everybody in with a contest with a 1000 GBP reward, then once it got into top 5 they changed the title to support Ant.
December '12 MoLA - Final Report Good article, unfortunately votes were bought.
I went through each article to emphasize how much of a problem this is. Every article in the top 10 (and beyond) had votes bought for them and only two of them were top 5 worthy. Clearly this is a problem that requires more public attention IMO.
Political Affiliations
This is a problem that needs to be addressed. During election time, most parties nominate a candidate for president. Most parties do this through some sort of primary or other voting method. After a candidate is nominated, everybody in that party for some reason feels obligated to vote for him. In case you didn't know, we live in a Democracy, so you can vote for whoever you like.
Don't vote for somebody just because your party tells you to. You have a voice in this country, so use it. Vote for who you feel will do the best job as president, whether it is BA, Beta, or Bloggs.
Remember, it is an election, not a popularity contest.
Sir Nick
During BA's last term, he removed Sir Nick from his position of MoHA. From Big Ant's article, [CP] - More War & Peace Summit + NHS, he says, "Last night I made the decision to remove Sir Nick from cabinet. Abusing the position of minister is something I reject, hence the decision."
So, what does Big Ant do this month? He gives Sir Nick a position of great importance, Head of the Ambassador program.
Let me get this right... Big Ant gave somebody with a history of abusive power and immaturity the power to represent us to foreign nations?
I know I am not the only one angry with this odd and poor decision.
As always, take it with a pinch of salt. These are just my personal beliefs and opinions.
Signed,
P.S. Please take the time to vote this article and maybe even give it a shout if you'd like.
Firstly, I would like to congratulate Big Ant on his reelection, it was a close and exciting race.
Secondly, here is my rant on the election. As usual, take it wait a pinch of salt.
Vote Buying
I've discussed this before, and I feel as if I should discuss it again.
Vote buying is a large problem here in the eUK. Since I've first joined the eUK, I've often seen articles in the top 5 that don't belong there. I'm sure this annoys us all. Since this is a universal petpeev, I don't think I have to elaborate on it.
But, I will elaborate on vote buying during campaign season. I have no problem with candidates and their supporters writing articles promoting themselves. I do have a problem when they start buying votes for these articles. Here is why:
-Money spent on articles could have been spent bettering our nation. Instead, they it is being sent overseas.
-High quality articles are blocked from the top 5 (or forced have votes bought for them)
-And most importantly, it unfairly sways voters. Nowadays, it seems as if instead of the best man (or women) for the job getting elected, the candidate with the most money is getting elected. Instead of candidates spending their time proving to the people they are worthy to serve, they are to busy competing with their opposition for control of the top 5 with lousy articles.
Currently, all of the articles in the top 5 were bought with votes, (as of 17:23 day 1873) and in the past few days, several articles were published supporting a candidate. Here are the top 10 articles (at the time this article was written, 17:23 day 1873)
I can buy votes too! An excellent piece of satire. Can't really complain much about this article. I guess there is always an exception to the rule.
[ALFA]This is my Cabinet I guess you could call it political humor. I honestly believe that votes should not have been bought for this article.
[1V] Supply Notice Just another MU promoting it's self at the expense of others. Mega votes bought for an article that virtually nobody cares about.
[Thomas] Day 1872, foreign affairs A high quality article that deserves to be in the top 5. Unfortunately, votes had to be bought to get it there.
A Rookie An article written by a youngster just trying to help. I feel bad saying this, but his article is not top 5 worthy. If your are a youngster like him and want to make a difference, find a way to get involved. I recommend the ambassador program (if it will be run right this term). It is a great way to learn about the eWorld and get your name out there.
[ESO] Eat Some Omelette: Grab your free things! Eh. At least their article is benefiting the people more than they are benefiting themselves.
[BA] - This is it - The Cabinet BA buying votes to promote himself.
[Beta] My Cabinet! Beta buying votes to promote himself.
We Support BigAnt This article is the most devious of them all. They lured everybody in with a contest with a 1000 GBP reward, then once it got into top 5 they changed the title to support Ant.
December '12 MoLA - Final Report Good article, unfortunately votes were bought.
I went through each article to emphasize how much of a problem this is. Every article in the top 10 (and beyond) had votes bought for them and only two of them were top 5 worthy. Clearly this is a problem that requires more public attention IMO.
Political Affiliations
This is a problem that needs to be addressed. During election time, most parties nominate a candidate for president. Most parties do this through some sort of primary or other voting method. After a candidate is nominated, everybody in that party for some reason feels obligated to vote for him. In case you didn't know, we live in a Democracy, so you can vote for whoever you like.
Don't vote for somebody just because your party tells you to. You have a voice in this country, so use it. Vote for who you feel will do the best job as president, whether it is BA, Beta, or Bloggs.
Remember, it is an election, not a popularity contest.
Sir Nick
During BA's last term, he removed Sir Nick from his position of MoHA. From Big Ant's article, [CP] - More War & Peace Summit + NHS, he says, "Last night I made the decision to remove Sir Nick from cabinet. Abusing the position of minister is something I reject, hence the decision."
So, what does Big Ant do this month? He gives Sir Nick a position of great importance, Head of the Ambassador program.
Let me get this right... Big Ant gave somebody with a history of abusive power and immaturity the power to represent us to foreign nations?
I know I am not the only one angry with this odd and poor decision.
As always, take it with a pinch of salt. These are just my personal beliefs and opinions.
Signed,
P.S. Please take the time to vote this article and maybe even give it a shout if you'd like.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
good points raised, voted
To be honest vote buying for satire is just as stupid. Keeps good articles out top 5 etc.
I think if we start deciding on what ones are contrary to the rule wed all be arguing again
people are going to do it. We just need to live with that
I agree that vote buying for satire should not be tolerated, but the "I can buy votes too" is the one exception. It's message was very powerful and even the simplest of individuals can comprehend it. It brought the issue to the attention of the nation in a very satirical and ironic way.
voted and subbed, good article, points v well made
Some good points raised like keeping good stories out the top and people wasting money but this I don't agree with at all !
"And most importantly, it unfairly sways voters."
Give people some credit, just because a story is in the top 5 will have no ounce of difference which way someone will vote... come on....... are you saying voters are that dumb?
A fair system would be come election day each of the TOP 5 party should have 1 space in the TOP 5 news to get there message out.
And New Era didn't take part in any voting buying this month !
Quite amusing that the eventual top 5 had no articles from the presidential campaigns in it - lots of money down the drain. If they'd not bought any they probably would have ended up with most of the top 5 articles between them.
eUK has no 'high quality' articles. Apart from the muck racker...
If spenig money does not sway voters, then why was there more than $1.9 billion (£1441032200.00) spent on the US presidental election? Because it sways voters. Which ever candidate gets more publicity will have a greater chance of winning
Which ever candidate gets more publicity will have a greater chance of winning
I don't agree with that either .
Who ever has most support has a great chance of winning , come election day it don't matter what story is in the top 5 it makes not one blind bit of difference if you can come back to me and show me otherwise I would eat my hat , poll the voters ask them if they changed there vote due to a story being in the top 5 otherwise you are just flaming and causing more problems in the eUK , problems people don't need
Like I said all parties should agree to have 1 space in the TOP 5 come election day problem solved .
Next Topic please
V+S
Agree with the points raised - Unfortunately there's noting stopping them to do so
you cant legislate for it 🙁
Advertising does not often directly alter a consumer (or voters) decision. But, it does subconsciously affect their decision on what product to buy or who to vote for. That's why corporations spend a ton of money on commercials and politicians spend a ton of money of ads. They do it because it works.
P.S. Nobody else seems to have a problem with that statement except you. You are the one turning a simple debate into what you call "flaming"
Well thought out argument on vote buying along with touching on a fairly important subject involving sir nick. In the spirit of fairness I don't actually think that he'll have any direct contact with either foreign nations or the members of public because all he's in charge of is the ambassador program. Basically he's organising who goes where - but it will be up to the ambassadors themselves to publish their findings. He's basically a glorified secretary for 5 days and then thats it.
BA has basically added in Nick into a cabinet "role" which has no real meaning or purpose simply because his name: 1) Shocks - and continues to divide the eUK 2) UKPP need to be seen to be getting their share of cabinet power ofc and 3) Its the only place you can put him without damaging either the eUK internally or externally.
Hopefully we'll see a return to voting for candidates based on merit - but that would require running candidates with merit.
It's a good attempt at trying to damage my reputation. Bravo.
Firstly, please provide proof that I was abusive of power and immature... what did I do? I recruited, as any other Party President does... and I DIDN'T use my position as MoHA to 'bribe' noobs to join The UKPP. I never mentioned my position in recruitment articles. If anything, I was bullied from the MoHA position by people who still, sadly, had access to the MoHA org, and were changing everything that I wrote. I therefore gave up because I was getting hassle from people who were accusing me of things.
Secondly, I do not fight because I use up my FF producing WRM so that I can supply the Royal Navy and help with Party Programs.
You shouldn't come from the eUS and accuse people of things without getting to the bottom of the story.
Sir Nick , nobody can't harm your reputation.
Like I always say... Take it with a pinch of salt, meaning don't believe everything you read. I respect you opinion Don. I respect your opinion, and you should respect mine. You challenged my statement, so I fought back with facts and stats. You rebutted with nonsense then accuse me of dividing the uk. You are the one flaming, not me.
You lost all credibility when you called the worst article and most disgusting waste of money "An excellent piece of satire.".
If after reading this entire article you believe I have no credibility due to the type of literature I find appealing, then let it be. Satire is not for everybody
v+s
I'm glad about the publicity, General Slim. It only adds to my character. But they are blatant lies created by 'them'. And I know you're an intelligent writer and whatnot. Put yourself above them.
True colours shine through, don't treat a new player like this. Also FYI, I didn't buy the votes for ESO, but if someone knows who did that'd be useful info!
I bought the votes for your article JamesW (I also did the same for Thomas7654321).
I also deleted my own 'cabinet' article prior to this article being published (@1400H day 1873) but this timestamp was fudged by the author to furthur his point of view.
And stop joining each party and spamming this link on there shout board
Spammer
well well well ...okay apart from the rookie comment...a tat bit arrogant perhaps... no???
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire
Goku, what was your intent on publishing that wiki? It says, "Satire is a genre of literature, and sometimes graphic and performing arts, in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement." His article was exactly that. It was a form of literature that addresses the abuses and shortcomings of the eUK for the purpose of shaming individuals who vote bought and to improve society
Also, you shamed me for calling it an "excellent" piece of satire. In fact, that wiki later says. "A common feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—"in satire, irony is militant" " I previously said, " It brought the issue to the attention of the nation in a very satirical and ironic way." So, according to your source this is not only satire, but excellent satire
Agreed with vote buying being bad.
He ain't no new player... Welcome back!
He ain't no new player... Welcome back! x2
Of course not this player has a axe to grind , and some deep rooted views .
Welcome back