Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: [Discussion] The purpose of "oppose" in amendments and decisions

  1. #1
    Flinn's Avatar His Dudeness of TWC
    Patrician Citizen Moderator Emeritus Content Emeritus Administrator Emeritus Gaming Emeritus

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    17,511
    Blog Entries
    35

    Default [Discussion] The purpose of "oppose" in amendments and decisions

    You'll pardon me, but I'm a very practical dude.

    If all that it takes to have an amendment/decision (or award) to be moved to vote is 3 supports, then what's the real purpose of opposing them, to begin with? I mean, in principle that is obvious, you state your opposition to the idea and explain why you oppose it (and maybe convince others of your position), but in practical terms stating "oppose" means nothing, doesn't it?

    To be honest with you, it bugs me that we have, sometimes, proposals that have 3 supporters and 10 opposers and still get to vote, when everybody knows that they are not going to pass (the more with the 2/3rd barrier of non abstaining votes); I'm not of course implying that opposing should discount supporting, that would be a pre vote we don't need ofc, but maybe the threshold to move it to vote should be higher? maybe a fixed percentage? (yes it's impractical I know, guess what happens when someone jumps on the wagon late..).

    Thoughts?
    Under the patronage of Finlander, patron of Lugotorix & Lifthrasir & joerock22 & Socrates1984 & Kilo11 & Vladyvid & Dick Cheney & phazer & Jake Armitage & webba 84 of the Imperial House of Hader

  2. #2
    Iskar's Avatar Insanity with Dignity
    Magistrate

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Frankfurt, München, somtimes my beloved Rhineland
    Posts
    6,373

    Default Re: [Discussion] The purpose of "oppose" in amendments and decisions

    Opposed.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    I guess any counting of percentages of "support"s and "opposed"s is going to be problematic, because there may be many citizens not participating in the discussion that might vote one way or another without prior indication. E.g. a proposal may have very few vocal supporters and a number of opponents raising minor points, but the majority may still vote in favor in the end, because they saw no need to repeat again what the vocal supporters said.
    "Non i titoli illustrano gli uomini, ma gli uomini i titoli." - Niccolo Machiavelli, Discorsi
    "Du musst die Sterne und den Mond enthaupten, und am besten auch den Zar. Die Gestirne werden sich behaupten, aber wahrscheinlich nicht der Zar." - Einstürzende Neubauten, Weil, Weil, Weil

    On an eternal crusade for reason, logics, catholicism and chocolate. Mostly chocolate, though.

    I can heartily recommend the Italian Wars mod by Aneirin.
    In exile, but still under the patronage of the impeccable Aikanár, alongside Aneirin. Humble patron of Cyclops, Frunk and Abdülmecid I.

  3. #3
    Muizer's Avatar member 3519
    Patrician Artifex

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,030

    Default Re: [Discussion] The purpose of "oppose" in amendments and decisions

    Iskar is correct about the motivation.There once was a time when any proposal was debated and amended until most debaters could agree or at least not oppose. The original proposer had no particular initiative over where the proposal went or what went to the vote or when. The proposal could morph into something he or she was actually opposed to and still go to the vote. The citizenry tended to just accept that whatever proposal got to the vote. Basically, the most persistent debaters tended to win out. That's why changes were made to give the proposer more initiative: a minimum required number of supporters, regardless of the number of opposers and the proposer's initiative to decide what goes to the vote and when. It is up to the proposers to judge to what extent they compromise with people who oppose. I think the system is ok still, although the dwindling number of voters has increased the import of every voice in the debate.
    "Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -

  4. #4
    Gaius Baltar's Avatar Roma in aeternum
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    campus Martis
    Posts
    7,171
    Blog Entries
    9

    Default Re: [Discussion] The purpose of "oppose" in amendments and decisions

    Opposition suggests that someone has competing ideas about the language. It can be helpful if they explain their argument and suggest alternatives.

    Gaius lights his pipe and takes a puff. A circle of smoke escapes his lips and curls off into the cold winters night. His eyes gleam with a brilliant blue fire. His face crinkles and he says, "The gun is cold!".

    Anyway thats what I think happened. Someone was in opposition to the idea of the cold gun. Just think how much better things would have been if they had just expressed their feelings.



    Pillaging and Plundering since 2006

    Neither is this the dawn from the east, nor is a dragon flying above, nor are the gables of this hall aflame. Nay, mortal enemies approach in ready armour. Ravens are calling, wolves are howling, spear clashes and shield answers


  5. #5
    Muizer's Avatar member 3519
    Patrician Artifex

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,030

    Default Re: [Discussion] The purpose of "oppose" in amendments and decisions

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius Baltar View Post
    Someone was in opposition to the idea of the cold gun. Just think how much better things would have been if they had just expressed their feelings.
    Probably Gaius himself, but Caprica 6 is not to be denied.
    "Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -

  6. #6
    Akar's Avatar I am not a clever man
    Patrician Citizen Censor

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    a 7/11 parking lot with Patron and LaCroix
    Posts
    18,446
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: [Discussion] The purpose of "oppose" in amendments and decisions

    Pretty much what Iskar said.

    I think 3 supporters is sufficient as is. That means at least 4 people (including the proposer) think that the proposal is a good idea. Changing things to a percentage would just overly complicate things.

    And honestly, I don't see an issue with things being put to vote that eventually or inevitably get voted down.

    Join the Thema Devia Discord here
    Son, Heir, and Wartime Consigliere of King Athelstan

    Proud Patron of Sara Temer, Cope, Gyrosmeister, and Geg






  7. #7
    Gigantus's Avatar I don't get worked up over people anymore: they get a post-it with 'ridiculous' on their forehead and that's it.
    Patrician Citizen Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Goa - India
    Posts
    51,223
    Blog Entries
    31

    Default Re: [Discussion] The purpose of "oppose" in amendments and decisions

    Yeah, I am with the self assessment. Impractical, pre vote etc. And general participation levels could mean that increasing the required 'support' level simply kills the baby in the crib.

    Totally with the motivation but opposed for practical reasons.

    Based on current experience I would be equally opposed to the principle mentioned by muizer that the proposer has no control over his proposal.
    Last edited by Gigantus; October 26, 2021 at 01:54 AM.




  8. #8
    Flinn's Avatar His Dudeness of TWC
    Patrician Citizen Moderator Emeritus Content Emeritus Administrator Emeritus Gaming Emeritus

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    17,511
    Blog Entries
    35

    Default Re: [Discussion] The purpose of "oppose" in amendments and decisions

    Quote Originally Posted by Gigantus View Post
    Totally with the motivation but opposed for practical reasons.
    yes impracticability is the main issue here, I guess

    Based on current experience I would be equally opposed to the principle mentioned by muizer that the proposer has no control over his proposal.
    well one can always withdraw the proposal at any point before it goes to vote, or they can simply neglect to update the OP because of pressure of the majority of opposers and let it die after the usual 28 days period.

    thanks everybody for the input, anyways
    Under the patronage of Finlander, patron of Lugotorix & Lifthrasir & joerock22 & Socrates1984 & Kilo11 & Vladyvid & Dick Cheney & phazer & Jake Armitage & webba 84 of the Imperial House of Hader

  9. #9
    Sir Adrian's Avatar the Imperishable
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nehekhara
    Posts
    16,289

    Default Re: [Discussion] The purpose of "oppose" in amendments and decisions

    Or move it vote after 28 days when none of the opposes are watching.


    Anyway, I fully agree with Iskar on this.
    Under the patronage of Pie the Inkster Click here to find a hidden gem on the forum!


  10. #10
    PikeStance's Avatar Assume Good Intentions
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Tirana, Albania
    Posts
    12,674
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default Re: [Discussion] The purpose of "oppose" in amendments and decisions

    Normally a move to vote just needs to be seconded. it is strange that here it need a third. However, a motion to vote could be a way to "kill" a resolution if you think it will fail.

    In any event, the fact that people publicly state opposition doesn't mean the silent members will vote accordingly. However, the number of votes is so low relative to the number of participants it makes that scenario unlikely.


    The real problem is that people rarely enter into a discussion with consensus in mind. It becomes, just like every theoretical debate thread, a zero sum debate. I can easily count on one hand the number times someone changed their minds in a discussion.
    MODDERS WANTED | MY PATRONAGES
    Imperial Splendour is looking for Modders and Researchers. SEE AD HERE
    If interested, contact PikeStance(Mod Leader/Manager) or Quintus Hortensius Hortalus (Mod leader /Lead Artist)

    Under the Patronage of Omnipotent- Q | Member of the House of Wild Bill Kelso
    Patron of
    _Tataros_
    | Magister Militum Flavius Aetius | Alwyn | Lord Oda Nobunaga | Massive_attack |
    Proposed the Following - PHALERA: Mangalore & sumskilz | OPIFEX: wangrin, z3n, Swiss Halberdier, and Frodo45127


    Honourable Society of Silly Old Duffers | House of Noble Discourse

  11. #11
    Flinn's Avatar His Dudeness of TWC
    Patrician Citizen Moderator Emeritus Content Emeritus Administrator Emeritus Gaming Emeritus

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    17,511
    Blog Entries
    35

    Default Re: [Discussion] The purpose of "oppose" in amendments and decisions

    Archived as per the usual procedure
    Under the patronage of Finlander, patron of Lugotorix & Lifthrasir & joerock22 & Socrates1984 & Kilo11 & Vladyvid & Dick Cheney & phazer & Jake Armitage & webba 84 of the Imperial House of Hader

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •