New Proposal for negative votes on proposals

Although this was rejected I am reproposing it to add clarification on why it or "something like it" in effect or result is important.

right now its not so important but as these proposals start to get more attention etc.. and the population rises it will become important.

you say you will look at 500 and up votes. what happens if 600 people get together to "want" something but 10,000 others do not want it.

those other 10,000 basically dont have a vote ?? (lack of a vote is not a vote because its an utterly unknown and unknowable factor ie its moot)

One idea to prevent frivilous voting in this regard is that a negative vote would cost you TWO of your available votes.

and it would not reduce the vote count of the proposal just show up alongside it.

this would prevent or at least help make public the problems we have in society today with for example politicians or special interest groups passing laws that the majority definately does not agree with or does not want yet by the time the law passes the majority gets no say in the matter.

as of now we have no way of expressing our "dislike" of a law that might not be in the best interest of the populace. (ie a way of expressing our dislike that carries any weight or visibility) even if I see a proposal I know is wrong or I dont like I can spread the word but it does no good since what can we do regardless of how far is spreads to be heard ?

I imagine grose deficiancies will be seen by the SL staff and simply rejected regardless of the number of votes.

but as SL gets larger (and I HOPE it gets a lot larger) I could see a problem with not having the ability to "officially" speak out against a proposal that the majority does not like.

maybe a better solution. make the negative votes hidden until they equal the "affirmative" votes ?? this way griefers in the minority can not cause trouble for an otherwise legitimate proposal.

I dont know the details for how to make it work right I just know that it is important to have "something" in place to this effect.

Chris Taylor
Nerys Zaius
http://www.nerys.com/

That would be a great idea if we had more votes to work with. I don't see many people wanting to neg a proposal if they can put that vote to something they wish to see approved...

I dont see many people wanting to neg something either.

but what happens in 2 year from now when SL is hopping lindens have the staff to crank our or impliment proposals and some cranks get a really nasty hidden proposal in place and enough votes to get SL attention ?

or for something "important" it would be nice to have the ability to vote.

maybe give uses 10 pos votes and 5 neg votes. not sure but "something" really should be in place for visible meaningful feedback on a proposal that many do not want.

I did not even use all 10 of mine. I used up the rest for things I liked. I tend to reserve the votes for things that are important. not just "wanted' by me

Chris Taylor
Nerys Zaius
http://www.nerys.com/

I like this idea, except I would formulate it differently.

Perhaps we should be allowed to simply vote on a proposal "yay or nay," and one time only. Thus we all get one vote on each proposal, yes or no. It's kind of neat that we can put more than one vote on a proposal right now, but I am not sure what actual purpose it serves.

In my case I put all ten of my votes on the first day on what i considered to be the most important proposal.

Little did I know at the the time that not only is there faint hope of the proposal being implemented anytime in the next two years, it is also (unfortunately), "possible" so it wont ever be removed from this hopeful little list.

So the upshot is:

- I have been here half a year now and I only got to vote "once" (really).

- It will likely be at least another year before I get to vote again (if I am still playing then)

- I have effectively eliminated my ability to vote on anything at all positive or negative until hell freezes over or the Lindens make up their mind on this proposal.

Is that fair? I have opinions on all the proposals, but no one will ever hear them, least of all the Lindens, and there are thousands of folks out there that would have similar opinions that are not even being heard.

If we had negative votes, I would vote against this proposal.

Seriously, you have a point. I believe we should recognize the problems with our voting systems and address them with improvements. While I might agree that all voting systems have their problems, we can also make strong cases for why some are far better than others.

Some kind of ordering of preferences is better than no preferences., which is better than only having a small number of votes, or only one vote when there are many choices. Given the hundreds of choices, our 10 votes are spread too thin to effectively weight against the bad choices.

Some issues are polarizing, where people are either strongly for it or against it, rather than having most people somewhere near the middle. If the opposition to an issue is significantly strong enough, it should be able to counter the supporters.