On Dec 17, 2007 11:45 AM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Each player has a IVPOP (Internal Voting Power on OPs). Players > vote FOR or AGAINST proposals in the public forum, as currently. > If the majority of IVPOPs in a party are FOR a proposal, that party > votes FOR, otherwise AGAINST. If no first-class player casts a > vote in a particular party, that party doesn't vote [note: implies > quorum of 3 first-class players].
It also removes the rationale of win by voting power, since a player can at most exert full control over only a single party. Which I think is a good thing. Another interesting system might be to let each player have an IVLOP in each party, randomly initialized to K > 0 in one party and 0 in the others. A player is a member of the party is the one in which eir IVLOP is greatest; in case of a tie, e has no party (or e continues to be a member of whichever party e was in immediately before the tie came about). A party votes either all FOR or all AGAINST according to the votes of all players times their IVLOP in that party, but only if at least one first-class party member voted (still implies quorum of 3 first-class players). This would require players to consider whether it is more effective to concentrate their IVLOP in their party or to spread it about. The downside is that it would make win by voting power more complicated, not less. > [option: weight internal VI> > AI as well, but would prefer not to do this for simplicity]. I think that it would be best to do this. If all three parties have the same PVLOP, then the four possible VIs are 0, 0.5, 2, and Unanimity. Any ordinary proposal will fail with the first two or pass with the second two, regardless of its actual AI. -root
