We have a President, should we have petitions?

[The Jetman]

Usually presidents and PMs have a way for us the people to give them suggestions, protest and so on.

so i wonder, should we have a petitions section (within the so called government section?) with a system in place, if we receive a certain number of votes, an high-ish amount so only the real ones get in, maybe above 60-75% in favour & over 100 to 150 Votes? we then send this to MA with a link for to the thread and hopefully they might respond with their thoughts or reasons why

Now i understand this is unlikely, but if we don't send lots of stupid petitions and they start to respond on a few, we might get better communtion from them in the end

 

[Sionkiewicz]

That matters on what form of government we are living in within EU..

 

[matthew]

Yes but not 150. Needs to be more like 10% of the active population (1000+ votes).

Any petition with more than this number of signatures should be considered for debate in parliament (i.e. at some dev meeting at MA HQ). The creator/team behind the petition should be invited to join the meeting if the meeting is approved, either in person or via skype as a sort of witness and so that the outcome can be fed back to us.

Having the clause "considered for debate" means that "silly" petitions don't waste MA time but there is a trust that they are properly considered in a transparent way. At the very least MA must acknowledge the petition and explain why they chose not to debate it. Also we could petition for MA to reveal the loot pool secrets which would have obvious reasons why MA would not want to debate that so in general i think "considered for debate" is a good idea.

In the UK if a petition receives over 100,000 signatures it is considered for debate. From my understanding an review panel considers the petition and votes on whether is should or should not be debated. Most of the petitions so far have not been debated for various reasons.

 

[The Jetman]

Yes but not 150. Needs to be more like 10% of the active population (1000+ votes).

Any petition with more than this number of signatures should be considered for debate in parliament (i.e. at some dev meeting at MA HQ). The creator/team behind the petition should be invited to join the meeting if the meeting is approved, either in person or via skype as a sort of witness and so that the outcome can be fed back to us.

Having the clause "considered for debate" means that "silly" petitions don't waste MA time but there is a trust that they are properly considered in a transparent way. At the very least MA must acknowledge the petition and explain why they chose not to debate it. Also we could petition for MA to reveal the loot pool secrets which would have obvious reasons why MA would not want to debate that so in general i think "considered for debate" is a good idea.

In the UK if a petition receives over 100,000 signatures it is considered for debate. From my understanding an review panel considers the petition and votes on whether is should or should not be debated. Most of the petitions so far have not been debated for various reasons.

i'd love it to be 10% of the population, but as its not in-game and I doubt there is 1000 players active on PCF, even the most serious question wouldn't get a quarter that.

Silly questions can be filtered out by mods and just voting against the question, it's not a demand for a feature to be added, just a request for a response from the devs. it would be nice if there could be a skype'd answer from MA, but that's not gonna happen, I think a fairly detailed response, or even a Q/A from Kaj|Calypso is likely to suffice

but yeah all questions about loot pool, asking for people to be banned, step down should be locked by mods right away

 

[Sionkiewicz]

i'd love it to be 10% of the population, but as its not in-game and I doubt there is 1000 players active on PCF, even the most serious question wouldn't get a quarter that.

Silly questions can be filtered out by mods and just voting against the question, it's not a demand for a feature to be added, just a request for a response from the devs. it would be nice if there could be a skype'd answer from MA, but that's not gonna happen, I think a fairly detailed response, or even a Q/A from Kaj|Calypso is likely to suffice

but yeah all questions about loot pool, asking for people to be banned, step down should be locked by mods right away

PCF would not be the right vehicle for it. Either it would need to be EF or we would need the voting booths back in game.

 

[OZtwo]

OZ its not a joke it a plan.

This forum is dead because it was re-named calypso forum and sold to a Planet Partner..

The people on Calypso forum have a calypso state of mind, I prefer to encourage an "Entropia State of Mind"

From ND sorry but we simply will not have a vote.

 

[SpikeBlack]

Any thing like this should me in game and translated.

 

[Oleg]

No, far too many people are idiots.