Jump to content

  •     

Photo

Remove Top-5, Remove Candidates, Election Deposit

politics elections political party

  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 Majester

Majester

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 40 posts

Posted 13 September 2014 - 11:30 PM

The current top-5 system is a relic of the previous political module of constituencies and individual votes. Under the previous system, individual candidates garnered votes. Standing in other parties was a legitimate tactic with a clear measure of individual support. The current list system changed that.

You now vote for a party and its offering; not an individual. Each seat is won by a percentage of the total vote. The top-5 system hampers the evolution of the proportional representation by preventing non-Top-5 parties from running.

  1. I suggest that all parties are allowed to field candidates.
  2. I suggest that party presidents and vice presidents have the ability to approve the candidate list and remove unauthorized candidates. You are now voting for a party and not individuals.
  3. I suggest all parties have to pay a 5 G deposit to run candidates, which they forfeit if none are elected, and is returned if at lest one candidate is elected.

  • Hostilian and Mikhail Zarevich Kalashnikov like this

#2 Demonaire

Demonaire

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 14 September 2014 - 12:50 AM

As ever, I strongly support the current congress list system, precisely because there are the political parties who represent the population, and not the individuals.

 

But I agree with the numerals 1 (provided the implementation of a D'Hondt seat election system) and 2 (in the part of to remove candidates). And disagree with the 3.

 

Greetings,


  • BOUD1CCA likes this

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ FLIP THIS TABLE. ┻━┻ ︵ ヽ(°□°ヽ) FLIP THAT TABLE. ┻━┻ ︵ \('0')/ ︵ ┻━┻ FLIP ALL THE TABLES
ಠ_ಠ Put. ಠ__ಠ The tables. ಠ___ಠ Back.
(╮°-°)╮┳━┳
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ NEVER!!!!!!!!!!


#3 Mikhail Zarevich Kalashnikov

Mikhail Zarevich Kalashnikov

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 144 posts
  • LocationeSomewhere

Posted 20 September 2014 - 06:26 PM

I'm agree with this idea.

 

I belive is necessary to erase top5 thing, the top5 is a candy for multi accounters and Take overs.

(Related to this post: https://forum.erepub...ainst-multies/)

 

Point 1, totally agree

Point 2, actually you can set the not authorized candidates the last of the list, but beeing able to erase them can be also good.

Point 3, I think will be good for avoid lulzer candidates, but I would reduce the deposit price and maybe a variable deposit fee calculated in base of the number of members of the party?

 

Good post!

 

Edit:

 

I opened poll to all!

https://forum.erepub...l-party-system/


Edited by Mikhail Zarevich Kalashnikov, 20 September 2014 - 06:34 PM.

3028465-1.png


#4 dr.erol

dr.erol

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 17 posts
  • LocationIstanbul

Posted 20 September 2014 - 07:17 PM

As ever, I strongly support the current congress list system, precisely because there are the political parties who represent the population, and not the individuals.

 

But I agree with the numerals 1 (provided the implementation of a D'Hondt seat election system) and 2 (in the part of to remove candidates). And disagree with the 3.

 

Greetings,

 

+1



#5 Zeus Christou

Zeus Christou

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 21 September 2014 - 02:59 PM

 

The current top-5 system is a relic of the previous political module of constituencies and individual votes. Under the previous system, individual candidates garnered votes. Standing in other parties was a legitimate tactic with a clear measure of individual support. The current list system changed that.

You now vote for a party and its offering; not an individual. Each seat is won by a percentage of the total vote. The top-5 system hampers the evolution of the proportional representation by preventing non-Top-5 parties from running.

  1. I suggest that all parties are allowed to field candidates.
  2. I suggest that party presidents and vice presidents have the ability to approve the candidate list and remove unauthorized candidates. You are now voting for a party and not individuals.
  3. I suggest all parties have to pay a 5 G deposit to run candidates, which they forfeit if none are elected, and is returned if at lest one candidate is elected.

 

nice proposal! I think that paying a deposit of 2g for every candidate with a minimum of 6g and a maximum of 12g would be reasonable and would prevent trolls and too small parties from just annoying the people that want to vote and to small countries to play political games of making money from politics without caring at all.......







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: politics, elections, political party

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users