Forums

@@@ A New Polling System @@@

Quick find code: 317-318-697-66111376

Reminiscon

Reminiscon

Posts: 3,456Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Democracy sucks.

Literally anything is better. Meritocracy (Direct Democracy with weighted votes replacing unweighted votes), Constitutional Republic, or Dictatorship/Oligarchy would all be upgrades. The fact someone fresh off RS3 has the same say as someone who has been on OSRS for 6 years is ridiculous at this point.

I support. Although I believe that Senators should be able to remain for longer than 6 months if they meet certain requirements, such as max total level and a good track record.
Long live the Wilderness. Long live risk vs reward in PVM. Long live 2006.

18-Jul-2019 04:21:29

Reminiscon

Reminiscon

Posts: 3,456Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Slapping a higher req like 1000 or whatever doesn't fix the problem.

Make it a Meritocracy where we can vote, but our votes get weighted based on total level.

If you have 2277/2277 total, that is 100% and worth 1 full vote.

Someone with only 1138 total only gets 50%, which is worth 0.5 of a vote.

Someone with 2000 total gets 88%, which is worth 0.88 of a vote.
Long live the Wilderness. Long live risk vs reward in PVM. Long live 2006.

19-Jul-2019 19:24:24

Reminiscon

Reminiscon

Posts: 3,456Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Angel2D4 said:
Reminiscon said:
Slapping a higher req like 1000 or whatever doesn't fix the problem.

Make it a Meritocracy where we can vote, but our votes get weighted based on total level.

If you have 2277/2277 total, that is 100% and worth 1 full vote.

Someone with only 1138 total only gets 50%, which is worth 0.5 of a vote.

Someone with 2000 total gets 88%, which is worth 0.88 of a vote.


So your idea is that those with more free time on their hands should have more say.. BAD idea, if you want to keep the player base you currently have.. and attract new players.. ever.

Modern day gamers have lives outside of the games they play.. they have school.. jobs.. families..

Your idea would work perfectly for a game that has nothing more than those at the end of the game.. not so good for ANY other game.

I don't believe they have the game to please only the end game players.. and I don't believe they ever will.

edit for spelling error



First off, those who have been here for longer will have higher stats regardless of how much free time they have. Someone who started 6 years ago will have higher stats than someone who started 6 months ago in the vast majority of comparisons.

Second off, those who actually invest more time into the game know more about the game, which means they are more likely to make decisions for the long term health of the game. This is because they don't want a game they invested so much time in to deteriorate. You give the same weighting to some idiot who stepped off RS3 and you're just killing the game.

Third off, nobody is forced to play more to get more weighting. If the game isn't high on your priorities, then your vote weight would reflect that. Accept the fact that even a noob with 1200 total gets over half the say of a maxed player. It's better than being barred completely.

Fourth off, they still decide the poll questions. They can poll mid level content.
Long live the Wilderness. Long live risk vs reward in PVM. Long live 2006.

19-Jul-2019 23:57:10 - Last edited on 19-Jul-2019 23:57:21 by Reminiscon

Reminiscon

Reminiscon

Posts: 3,456Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Angel2D4 said:
Reminiscon said:
Slapping a higher req like 1000 or whatever doesn't fix the problem.

Make it a Meritocracy where we can vote, but our votes get weighted based on total level.

If you have 2277/2277 total, that is 100% and worth 1 full vote.

Someone with only 1138 total only gets 50%, which is worth 0.5 of a vote.

Someone with 2000 total gets 88%, which is worth 0.88 of a vote.


So your idea is that those with more free time on their hands should have more say.. BAD idea, if you want to keep the player base you currently have.. and attract new players.. ever.

Modern day gamers have lives outside of the games they play.. they have school.. jobs.. families..

Your idea would work perfectly for a game that has nothing more than those at the end of the game.. not so good for ANY other game.

I don't believe they have the game to please only the end game players.. and I don't believe they ever will.

edit for spelling error


Lastly, you criticize the proposed system of Meritocracy for not being perfect. It isn't a perfect system as no such thing exists.

Is it better than blind Democracy where Timmy with 300 total (who never even touched RuneScape back in say 2006) has the same say as Mike with 2277 total and years upon years of experience? Hell yes it's an improvement.

The fact is that no veteran of Old School wants Mobile trash/degenerates and RS3 degenerates coming in and transforming the game over time. Old School's values are meant to be fixed values or else it defeats the entire point of the server.
Long live the Wilderness. Long live risk vs reward in PVM. Long live 2006.

19-Jul-2019 23:59:37 - Last edited on 20-Jul-2019 00:00:40 by Reminiscon

Reminiscon

Reminiscon

Posts: 3,456Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Cosmic Star said:
I do agree that the poll system needs reworked. How I'm not sure. But if I'm not mistaken don't no voters currently have x3 the voting power than a yes voter? When it should be the majority rules. Not to mention I don't know if this is a true fact but from things I've seen over the years I feel it's safe to say people leaning to voting no on major updates are more often to use alts to vote in their favor.


No it shouldn't. Almost everything passes even with a 75% requirement.

I remember this clearly in 2012. Us VETERANS were discussing with Jagex what we wanted out of this server. Namely, that WE decide the updates. But we knew 50% was too permissive and would allow for Easyscape crap to get into the game. We gave numbers like 75% or 80%. Jagex ultimately decided to go with 75% which was a huge mistake, as 80% would have prevented a lot of shit content that passed at 75-79% and caused these veterans to quit.

The people who tend to vote no on alts are doing it because they care about the game to the extent they will buy bonds to get more votes.

There is an inherent bias for Yes because there are way WAY more noobs and newbies on this game than elites and veterans. Tell me how many questions get under 50%? Almost never any.

So no, we don't need to make this problem even worse by lowering the threshold. You would be setting the bar so low that this game would become 2012Scape overnight, and we know what happened after that... EoC. The system needs to be revamped altogether.
Long live the Wilderness. Long live risk vs reward in PVM. Long live 2006.

22-Jul-2019 07:50:36 - Last edited on 22-Jul-2019 07:51:51 by Reminiscon

Quick find code: 317-318-697-66111376Back to Top