2006 ENnies Judge Voting Poll/Thread

[Arnwyn]

What gets a person elected to the judging panel? People agreeing with their posts. You guys talk about popularity as though it is a bad thing. I don't really get that.

People might be using the word "popularity" to be synonymous with "name recognition among unrecognized names" - this does occur in most elections, most notably in school board elections in Canada, and is a major contributor to the favoring of incumbents. (No idea whether that actually happened in the ENWorld voting though.)

 

[fusangite]

People might be using the word "popularity" to be synonymous with "name recognition among unrecognized names" - this does occur in most elections, most notably in school board elections in Canada, and is a major contributor to the favoring of incumbents. (No idea whether that actually happened in the ENWorld voting though.)

But even if that is the case, I'm not sure what is wrong with it. Preferring to select a candidate with a known track record over one without is a rational political choice. Unless one is very dissatisfied with the status quo, it is, I would argue, the sensible thing to do. Even if this is what is going on, a person's voting intentions still come from a perceived accord with their candidate of choice.

 

[fusangite]

I suppose that would mean that a goodly portion of ENworlders actually agree with the sentiment-- and I paraphrase only mildly-- "3e sucks."

A common feature in multi-member plurality systems is, when there is a strong group with a healthy majority, associated with the status quo, their voters will often throw one vote to a high-profile opposition candidate because they come to believe that it is their job to, in addition to selecting the governing body, choose its "opposition" in the interests of balance.

In my home town, about 35 years into back-to-back right wing sweeps of city council, the voters backing the incumbent party began consistently electing the party with the addition of one high-profile Marxist. Interestingly, for the first 16 years he held office, the Marxist topped the polls in both right-wing and left-wing neighbourhoods because the right-wingers, realizing they had such a large majority they completely controlled the outcome, deliberately began installing the most strident opposition voice they could find.

So, diaglo, think of yourself as the token commie!

 

[diaglo]

So, diaglo, think of yourself as the token commie!

that's me. IYKWIMAITYD.

 

[Arnwyn]

Preferring to select a candidate with a known track record over one without is a rational political choice.

I think the implication people may be talking about is that the above statement really is saying "a track record", not a known one. If that's the case, I posit that there is little rationality other than familiarity with a name, since it is otherwise meaningless and completely divorced from any results. (Though, I do concede the possible rationale being: "no catastrophe has occurred yet, so I might as well vote for the incumbent" [the ol' if it ain't totally destroyed, don't fix it line of reasoning].)

Even if this is what is going on, a person's voting intentions still come from a perceived accord with their candidate of choice.

"Perceived" accord indeed - often with no basis in reality. People may be questioning how "good" it is when that agreement is based on, at best "recent experience" and at worst (and more likely, at least according to recent pundits about small-scale elections) "a name [read: a series of letters forming a proper noun] that I've heard before".

 

[fusangite]

I think the implication people may be talking about is that the above statement really is saying "a track record", not a known one. If that's the case, I posit that there is little rationality other than familiarity with a name, since it is otherwise meaningless and completely divorced from any results. (Though, I do concede the possible rationale being: "no catastrophe has occurred yet, so I might as well vote for the incumbent" [the ol' if it ain't totally destroyed, don't fix it line of reasoning].)

Yep. That was the rationale I was going for. Although I think you are casting it in overly negative terms given the lack of objections I hear to the judges' choices.

"Perceived" accord indeed - often with no basis in reality. People may be questioning how "good" it is when that agreement is based on, at best "recent experience" and at worst (and more likely, at least according to recent pundits about small-scale elections) "a name [read: a series of letters forming a proper noun] that I've heard before".

But this is a problem with all elections; indeed, it is inherent in the democratic process. Unless we moved to an appointment-based model of judge selection, there is not going to be a way around this. A voter will avail him or herself of all the information they deem they need to make their choice, no more, no less. As long as we accept democracy as a principle, it is not our business to challenge a voter on what information and how much information he or she thinks they need.

As someone who worked in elections, especially Vancouver municipal elections which use the same voting system as the ENNies, I have observed the phenomena to which you are making reference. As frustrating as it was, however, the very fact that most voters had radically different criteria for what information mattered about a candidate than I did reinforced my sense of the importance of democracy.

 

[Arnwyn]

Yep. That was the rationale I was going for. Although I think you are casting it in overly negative terms given the lack of objections I hear to the judges' choices.

Probably - I was just making a note about why (very few) people might say that they hoped that they weren't being voted in 'because of popularity'. [But, as I'm sure you're aware, the "lack of objections" could be due to a multitude of reasons. I think the comparison between my negative terms and that "given" is meaningless. Though in any case, my negative terms were not aimed at the ENWorld process and/or results - just a general note at the historical voting patterns in small-scale elections, due mainly to documented evidence of severe voter apathy.]

But this is a problem with all elections; indeed, it is inherent in the democratic process...

Absolutely. I totally agree with everything you said.

 

[DaveMage]

What gets a person elected to the judging panel? People agreeing with their posts.

Actually, I voted for Diaglo because he had the coolest avatar.

 

[trancejeremy]

Hmmm. Maybe there needs to be an avatar bathing suit competition....

 

[Teflon Billy]

Hmmm. Maybe there needs to be an avatar bathing suit competition....