View Topic

I was originally going to challenge the change in the voting period in the current Amendment under consideration from 7 to 5 days out of concern that the shortened period would disenfranchise voters who voted late. To be sure, I'm disappointed that changes are being made to the substance of the Amendment when I had thought the purpose of reintroducing the legislation was to only make grammar corrections. I would have personally preferred proposals for changes to the substance to go back to the Convention for consideration. However, when considering this particular change, I went back through the results of all regular elections except the first (which I can include when I get home), and considered two things:

1) The percentage of votes that were made in the two days which are being cut off
2) Whether the results of the elections would have changed if voting had only been five days

I found that on average, 16.47% of votes were cast during the final two days of voting, which is a small but not insignificant number of votes considering that in two elections the number approached 30% of votes cast. I then looked at the results when the last two days of votes were cut off, and found something very surprising considering how close our elections have been in the past...that out of 13 elections, closing voting after five days would have only altered the final result of 1 of them. It would have also altered the runoffs of two other elections, but not in a way which would have changed the final result.

I have concluded that shortening the voting period from seven to five days will not likely alter the outcomes of the vast majority of elections, so I am not challenging the change. However, I am still concerned that a shorter period will lower the number of people that will participate in elections. Although my research shows that a shorter voting period only has a low chance of altering the outcome, it is not impossible for it to do so, and it is still important that as many people make their voices heard as possible. If the Amendment passes, I would propose that we come up with a "get out the vote" plan that better informs our Citizens when votes are taking place and encourages them to vote, especially those Citizens that are more active one NS.net or the IRC than the forums, in order to counter any effect a shorter voting period may have.

Raw Conclusions

February 2014 - 10.50% - SAME
April 2014 - 20.00% - No runoff, but same final result
June 2014 - 14.81% - SAME
August 2014 - 26.09% - SAME
October 2014 - 17.39% - SAME
December 2014 - 9.52% - SAME
February 2015 - 15.38% - SAME
April 2015 - 15.00% - Chanku victory instead of Chanku/Point Breeze/Sapphiron runoff, which Sapphiron and Point Breeze won
June 2015 - 15.00% - SAME
August 2015 - 10.00% - SAME
October 2015 - 29.17% - SAME
December 2015 - 21.73% - Gerrick/Bodobol runoff, instead of Gerrick/Reon/Bodobol runoff (Reon withdrew before runoff)
February 2015 - 9.52% - SAME

AVERAGE: 16.47%

Yeah, we could try to increase the speed at which all people vote, but if I'm being completely honest, had I seen this before considering that change, I'd probably have been against the change.

That being said, I suppose our new form of voting will already change things quite a bit. I think we should research how much of an impact it could have somehow.

Unfortunately I didn't notice there were changes of substance being made until the day before I posted, and then I it was only the next day that I had the time to actually go through each election and look at the data. =/

I realized @Wintermoot has yet to vote on the matter. I hope this shortened voting period doesn't affect your perception of the bill or your ability to vote thereon; please remember the important part is that we're getting Storting reform passed.

My suggestion is to simply try out the streamlined voting process, and if we find it does not work and that voters are left out, the new Storting can pass a (much more minor) constitutional amendment changing the voting period back.

Constitutional amendments will in themselves be much simpler and more efficient upon the bill's passing.

To be honest, I just wasn't aware that it'd come to vote in the Overhusen. Sorry about the delay. =/