NationStates Jolt Archive

Well I brought this up before, but I made the mistake of mentioning the Necrophelia resolution. THIS IS AN INTELLECTUAL DISCUSSION OF THE HOW/WHY UN VOTERS, both regulars and occasional non-forum voters. Please, please, please, don't start debating the merits of current or past proposals in this thread, thank you.

To answer your original question from your previous thread that got hijacked...

Why do so many people vote against resolutions that seem almost "duh." Shoo-ins, so to speak...

Demographics, my friend. Demographics. There's always some group with an ideology that will lead them to oppose a resolution, as well as a number who will vote AGAINST because they don't understand it or because they were in a bad mood that day.

Personally, I tend to sometimes be part of the minority on a resolution because I have very strict and consistent ideas on what constitutes an appropriate resolution by this body.

I honestly think the vast majority of raw votes (not counting the skewing effect of Delegates) is by people who only read the title. It takes a lot of work to pass a Resolution or Repeal with an unpopular title (ie: Repeal "Gay Rights").

I honestly think the vast majority of raw votes (not counting the skewing effect of Delegates) is by people who only read the title. It takes a lot of work to pass a Resolution or Repeal with an unpopular title (ie: Repeal "Gay Rights").

By the same token, it's hard to defeat something with a popular title, such as "Individual Working Freedoms" or "Individual Self-Determination."

I don't think it's so much that people only read the title. I think (though I have no real evidence for this) that it's that many voters don't read the text in detail, and don't stop to make sure they understand what it means. The vast majority of UN voters, I'd guess, spend about five minutes a day playing NS, whilst some of us spend much much longer. They're not going to give a proposal the same consideration as someone who debates it on forums, or who has seen it undergo drafting.

I don't think it's so much that people only read the title. I think (though I have no real evidence for this) that it's that many voters don't read the text in detail, and don't stop to make sure they understand what it means. The vast majority of UN voters, I'd guess, spend about five minutes a day playing NS, whilst some of us spend much much longer. They're not going to give a proposal the same consideration as someone who debates it on forums, or who has seen it undergo drafting.Which means that we should be subjecting finished proposals to “fluffy bunny” analysis before we declare them good to go.

<sigh>

It's an election year here in the States, and I'm afraid that I just exceeded my cynicism quota.