Policy Review Policy Review: Voting Process

[X-Act]

If you are not an experienced member of the CAP community, it is strongly recommended that you do not post in this thread.

This thread is intended to contain intelligent discussion and commentary by experienced members of the CAP project regarding CAP policy, process, and rules. As such, the content of this thread will be moderated more strictly than other threads on the forum. The posting rules for Policy Review threads are contained here.

With that out of the way, I wish to discuss the particular case when people team up together to submit something, be it a movepool, art, a base stat spread, sprites or what have you.

If two people team up together in their creation, they have an automatic two votes for their submission, as obviously they will both vote for themselves. This provides an unfair advantage of one vote over the other people who submitted their stuff alone. Of course, if the group of people is even bigger, the vote advantage is even larger.

In view of this, I am suggesting the following change in the voting process:

People who have their own submissions being polled should not be allowed to vote.

This solves the problem completely and is very simple to implement.

What do you guys think?

 

[tennisace]

Not much to say here, I agree completely. This should be applied from the next art poll onward.

 

[ParadOxymoron]

But if they worked on the spread themselves, shouldn't their opinion, if anything, matter most of all? This seems to be mainly a question of logistics to me, and I disagree with your suggested notion that two people voting for their own spread is even an advantage at all. It's just two more people voting for the opinion they think is best... In a governmental election, the candidate is certainly allowed to vote for themselves. So are all the people who are running with them, and all of the people who campaigned for them. Why should this be any different?

Also, what about polls with multiple options? Then the people who the creators also like in addition to themselves will be short a vote for now reason.

It's a largely pointless policy that would only make things more complicated through the annoying necessity of having to enforce it.

 

[latinoheat]

i think you should just stop allowing people to submit a spread/artwork together.

 

[X-Act]

Government people voting for themselves makes sense because they all have one vote to do that, so it's fair. You don't see candidates team up together as one option.

And how is me teaming up with another person give us an opinion that matters more than yours?

If you think it doesn't give me an advantage, next time I'll team up with another 9 persons to have an automatic 9 vote advantage over everyone else.

 

[Time Mage]

Shouldn't be necessary most of the time, but it's definitely a good proposal, and useful in case of very, very close polls.

 

[wozfe]

I think that by saying "I suggest that we use this spread because I find it to be optimal" is just like saying "I'm voting for this spread". I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to vote for your own suggestion. And if two or more people create a submission together, they most likely do it because they all think it's the optimal choice, and thus would vote for it regardless of the creator.

A person who never would vote for spread X would never create spread X together with someone else. Who would suggest a spread which he/she completely dislikes?

I hope I made myself clear.

 

[DougJustDoug]

In order to make a clear rule to be followed, I think submitters should be disallowed from participating in poll threads completely. No voting. No lobbying. No attacking or defending. No discussion. Once the submissions are finalized, the poll should be in the hands of the community and the moderation staff. If a submitter has a concern, they need to voice it to the TL and let them handle it. This rule should apply to all "Submission-based" polls -- Concept, Art, Stat Spread, and Sprite. The Name poll is technically submission-based, but we traditionally do not credit the submitter in the actual poll, therefore I don't think we need to apply the rule there.

I have noticed two camps on the general topic of "self voting". Some people (myself included) consider it completely obvious, normal, and fair to vote for oneself in a poll. Other people are shocked and disappointed that self-voting is allowed at all. I have always voted for my own submissions. Rightly so, since I always consider them to be the best choice. Why would I make a submission, if I didn't think it was good? However, I always abstain from poll discussions (other than commenting on rules matters in my role as a moderator), for fear of appearing to "lobby" for my submission -- which I consider unseemly.

Although I have always voted for myself, I will gladly stop doing so if the proposal passes. I think the rule I mentioned above will discourage "campaigning" (which I really dislike), and remove the voting disparity that X-Act mentions.

 

[Darkflagrance]

i think you should just stop allowing people to submit a spread/artwork together.

This might not actually solve the problem. In that case, a group of five might still work together on a stat distribution or art submission, but then agree to let only one person officially enter it for the purposes of conforming to the rules...this would still result in extra votes, extra discussion/defense, etc. After the art or whatever wins, they can then step forward and claim credit if they wish.

EDIT: Also, X-Act gave an example of working together with 9 others to make a spread. Let us expand this example. If X-Act was somehow able to organize the entire community together to make a spread, and everyone voted on it unanimously because it was everybody's spread, would that be a bad thing?

 

[Kindred]

If you think your spread is the best, you should be able to vote on it. You've probably thought about it more than the average voter, so I don't see why you shouldn't be able to vote, just because you created one of the options.

If there's 9 people working together to make a spread, they should all be able to vote for that spread. They have their opinions, and it's silly to forbid them to vote.

 

[Gothic Togekiss]

This policy review seem more personal now since I feel the grouping of me and Goodbar has cause this to happening. Hopefully you're not angry at us directly, we didn't mean to piss you off. D:

Personally, I don't like the idea of complete stripping the submitters' right to vote within a poll where his/her submission is being held. If anything, the suggestion should be "Submitter(s) should not be allow to vote for their own submission". That would solve the problem better since you can't vote for your own thing, but still have the ability to vote.

 

[Frosty]

I kinda fail to see how it is unfair.

When 2 (or more) people get together to make a spread (for example), it is because both have very similar views of how the poke should act in that case. It is only normal that a view that attracts more people (2 as opposed to 1) gets more votes. It is only natural.

Say you have Mr.A and Mr.B who both would want to have a poke like aerodactly. On the first situation only Mr.A does the spread and Mr.B merely comments, and on the second situation, both make the spread together. What is the difference between them? On both situations we have 2 voters who would like to see the same kind of poke, with the only difference being how involved one of them is on the spread itself. Honestly, the only thing this may achieve is that people will be more inclined to work alone than together (which isn't the best option, since two minds are better than one).

 

[Mekkah]

I agree with Doug's stance. Lobbying in voting threads is going to swing stuff.

Voting should be representative of the community. Nine people teaming up does not decrease the community size by nine. Remember that they likely made a compromise - they can't all have what they want. The proposals are no longer theirs alone. They are representative of each of them.

 

[TAY]

Doug, I disagree that submitters should be removed from posting in poll threads. Why should people not be allowed to promote their own idea?

Often there are questions brought up in threads about certain submissions, or the discussion sheds the idea in a light in a way the creator did not intend. I remember back at the concept submissions for CaP 5, when I had submitted my idea for a pokemon that specializes in and benefits from having low HP, a lot of people were saying "isn't that just a reversal user?", and I felt the need to intervene and clarify. Perhaps this is more an issue in the concept poll than in others; I can see how in something like the Base Stat poll much of an explanation would not be needed.

We're already taking away the submitters' votes, why also take away their voices?

Mekkah, I do not see why lobbying for a certain idea should be against the rules. If you think something is the best idea, and you have reasoning for it, then the rest of the community should know that reasoning as well. Why are we trying to restrict the number of arguments that get made? Are we assuming that the average CaP voter is incapable of his/her own reasoning? It almost seems like we are trying to stifle intelligence here.

 

[DougJustDoug]

My idea has nothing to do with "suppressing" anyone. Submitters have plenty of voice in the submission threads. In fact, the submitters usually have far more input than anyone else in the community, because their submissions are the very topic of conversation in those threads. By the time we come to a vote on submissions, there is very little to discuss. In fact, all you can really do is vote, or lobby for or against a submission.

If you are lobbying FOR your submission, it's almost impossible for that lobbying to NOT be construed as lobbying AGAINST one or more other options. I don't have a problem with other people pushing their favorites (and, by extension, slamming others implicitly). But, I don't like it amongst the contestants themselves. Such contests very much skirt the line with mud-slinging and other "electioneering" that I have always considered distasteful.

I understand that others might consider lobbying completely right and proper. Just like I have no problem voting for myself, while others dislike the practice of self-voting. But, I don't like open lobbying and campaigning amongst contestants in a poll. I think the contestants should be "above the fray".

I understand that contestants might need to provide information on their submissions, or possibly correct a misunderstanding that reflects incorrectly on their submission during a voting thread. These situations should occur very rarely, and can be handled by a PM to the TL or a moderator, who can step in and communicate the appropriate information. It may seem a little silly to go through the TL for a simple information post, but I think such a structure is necessary to draw a clear line as to what is acceptable or not during voting threads.

Possibly the rule should only be enforced during click polls, since bold polls have an inherent discussion element to them. Also, bold polls are normally used in preliminary voting. By the time a click poll rolls around, it's almost certain that the "discussion" on all submissions is finished.

 

[eric the espeon]

I do not think that we should have a rule a rule that would block those who submit Stat Spreads/Art/ect from doing something that every other voter is allowed to do.

As far as I see it once the thing has been submitted it is out of the hands of whoever submitted it, and if they think that it is the best they should be able to vote for it and advocate why they think that whatever they voted for is the best. They should also be allowed to pick holes in the other poll options so long as their reasoning is fair and well explained.


As for X-Act's idea of getting 9 people to work on one stat spread:
If 9 people work on a spread (Already very hard to co-ordinate) and they all agree its the best one, then 9 people think that that spread is the best one. It does not matter in the least that they all helped on it, that number of of people want that spread to win.

 

[Wyverii]

The thing is that if you have a split of opinions such as this is it causes a slight imbalance in the polls from the non-voting submitters, the biased submitters and the fair submitters that honestly vote for what they think is the best whether it be their own submission or not. It's not normally something that affects a poll in someone's favor. I personally used to be bothered by submitters voting for their own creation and I still think it would be slightly fairer if submitters don't vote at all but i'm not that bothered about it anymore because of it's negligible impact on votes.

A problem with the general view of "they made it so they think it's the best" is that some people with sparse knowledge of the subject they've made a submission for is going to defend their submission solely because they made it and not because it's technically the best. The art threads would be the most subject to this thinking but as the number of people increase on one submission the less prone the group will be to this sort of thinking. So again i'll say that the impact of selfish votes will be minuscule.

Frankly, i'm more concerned about drive by voting than this. This change isn't going to have much impact and I say lets not complicate things by restricting submitters (even though i'd like submitters to be non-voting in my heart of hearts).

 

[Goodbar]

Hmm I'll just use the case this is being based off of as why this isn't a particularly beneficial idea. Me and GT submitted similar BS spreads, which is why we teamed up. Had we not teamed up and say GT's spread made it to the next round and mine had not, I would have very likely voted GT's spread the entire way. If this rule was implemented, then we'd basically be getting one less vote because we decided to team up (though it wouldn't have mattered this time), and if we didn't we'd have that extra vote. When you decide to team up with someone, it's usually because you share similar views, and thus you'd be voting on the same page.

As for lobbying, I guess it seems ok as long as a shitfest doesn't erupt. Besides when the voting occurs, most people don't bother to read through the thread before voting.

 

[Hyra]

I don't really see a point to this. The recent poll was the closest one we have ever had, and that one more mattered on timing than anything else.

I do agree with no lobbying though. Look back at the Revenankh art thread where TaB basically went around insulting other artists as a way of promoting his own. This is where Doug draws the no lobbying example from.

 

[UberMunch]

I do not think that we should have a rule a rule that would block those who submit Stat Spreads/Art/ect from doing something that every other voter is allowed to do.

As far as I see it once the thing has been submitted it is out of the hands of whoever submitted it, and if they think that it is the best they should be able to vote for it and advocate why they think that whatever they voted for is the best. They should also be allowed to pick holes in the other poll options so long as their reasoning is fair and well explained.


As for X-Act's idea of getting 9 people to work on one stat spread:
If 9 people work on a spread (Already very hard to co-ordinate) and they all agree its the best one, then 9 people think that that spread is the best one. It does not matter in the least that they all helped on it, that number of of people want that spread to win.

I have a similar view, eric. If someone works with someone else on one submission, it only means that there would be that same amount of people voting for said submission.

I originally agreed with X-Act on this, but the more I thought about it, the more it didn't seem to fit. I don't think any member of this community should be prohibited from voting (member not drive-by). If we were to do this then it would actually discourage multi-person submissions; they would lose two people's votes instead of just one. I don't think this needs to change.

On the lobbying subject, I think many of the TL OP's address this enough. Tennis' most recent in the art poll is a good example. They discourage criticism, and I think that is enough.

 

[Hazmat]

If you are an artist, and your work is in the thread:

1. Vote on whatever, if your work is your favorite, then vote for it.
2. Post what you voted for. I think it's underhanded to vote for yourself and not let everyone that you did.
3. Shut up about that stuff until the next poll starts. Repeat step three if another related poll follows.

Do not talk about your entry, do not talk badly about anyone elses entry.

 

[billymills]

As for X-Act's idea of getting 9 people to work on one stat spread:
If 9 people work on a spread (Already very hard to co-ordinate) and they all agree its the best one, then 9 people think that that spread is the best one. It does not matter in the least that they all helped on it, that number of of people want that spread to win.

However, in the event of multiple spreads being very similar, they would vote with the one with their name attached and therefore make it more difficult for single submitters.

I'd support X-Act (and Doug's) proposal because it would make it fairer for all submissions to not have 2+ people lobbying for the same submission (in first and second round voting). And in final votes, the submissions with multiple people would already have a unfair advantage.