In voting, if some one where to not vote on a said subject, that does not imply a agree or disagree with it. All it implies is that they didn’t want to have a say or vote in it.
However this exactly DB treats their votes.
Since the recent update now 51% of the LOBBY has to vote yes or no for a vote to pass.
The problem is that some people simply don’t vote, and that’s completely fine you shouldn’t be forced to do it, but at the same time your non-participation should not be registered.
For example, I’m in a match where i call a team shuffle.
If FIVE people vote YES, and TWO people vote NO, logically speaking the vote should pass because since only 7 people voted, five passes by the 51% mark.
I see what you are saying, and I agree for the most-part, however… What about the votes that go 2-1, and no one else votes? That’s not a fair sample from the server.
Honestly, I think they still need to make votes more obvious, and take the voting buttons OFF the merc selection keys - because I know I’ve accidentally voted several times by selecting a merc, and no doubt plenty of others have too.
What I would say the requirements for passing a vote should be, is:
AT LEAST 50% of the server participate in the vote.
51% or above agree “Yes”.
By doing this, you still keep a “majority” in both ideals. Just my thoughts.
Another suggestion could be that the vote has to positively gather 50% of the server population, meaning on a 8vs8 server, eight yes-votes iare needed to pass, instead of the nine required now. Chances are the teams are pretty stacked, if you get that outcome.
But I don’t even like that idea. It could be abused by the loosing team, if they agree upon it! Who would not like to get a free chance of winning, by pressing F1 close the end of a match?
Furthermore, by not validating non-voters (as the non-consenting they are,) you are effectively forcing them to vote, which is a distraction and can be abused!
And I do not like the idea of a more complex tiered voting-system. It would make votes an even further distraction.
@Runeforce
Saying that implies that people who don’t vote are saying no. That’s not true. They just don’t want to vote. They are not the majority. The people who vote are the minority’s and majority.
No one is forcing someone to vote. They just need to understand whether they vote or not something can change and if you don’t want that change then you can vote. Because the sole reason why people don’t vote is apathy.
Same for you @Faraleth
Saying this is unfair is like saying Americas voting system is unfair which it’s not.
I am not implying anything, I am just saying that people who are not consenting, are not consenting. As stated, a majority of the population should consent to a proposed major change of state for it to be democratic valid.
[quote=“stupefyingMob;92525”]They just don’t want to vote […] the sole reason why people don’t vote is apathy.
[/quote]
@stupefyingMob It’s a vote on yes or no, not a political vote. Binary choice and multiple choice are very different types of voting systems - coupled with the low sample size of the matches - this is why my suggestion holds up for the theoretical “majority”.
[quote=“Runeforce;92527”]I am not implying anything, I am just saying that people who are not consenting, are not consenting. As stated, a majority of the population should consent to a proposed major change of state for it to be democratic valid.
[quote=“stupefyingMob;92525”]They just don’t want to vote […] the sole reason why people don’t vote is apathy.
[/quote]
You don’t know that.[/quote]
People who don’t vote of course are not consenting to VOTE. Therefore they are not a valid vote nor do they apply to the “majority”. The majority rule in democracy refers to the most number of people who VOTED, not the number of people who CAN vote. Totally different.
I’m completely understand what you mean.
A vote passing in a 8v8 server because only 1 voted no and 2 voted yes seems absurd, but it’s only logical if we are trying vote using the majority rule or democracy. Because right now the way voting works, is that if people don’t vote, they are essentially counting as a no.
So in a 8v8 server the vote for a shuffle can show 5 yes and 2 no, but in reality it’s 11 no and 5 yes due to how the voting system is. That’s unfair to people who don’t vote.
Good idea, now I can have friends with me and spam the votes to lock everyone in a voting screen![/quote]
Votekick for players wouldn’t do that, but teamshuffle would. And teamshuffle would be limited to once per round.
No, if you want to change something in the game state the majority of the players need to agree. To fix that, make it more noticeable. Then, if a player still don’t vote it simply mean he like the current state of the game, and thus don’t want to change it (and i’m ready to bet that if changed otherwise people that now don’t vote would start to vote no).
[quote=“BlackFro;92556”]People who don’t vote of course are not consenting to VOTE. Therefore they are not a valid vote nor do they apply to the “majority”. The majority rule in democracy refers to the most number of people who VOTED, not the number of people who CAN vote. Totally different.
[/quote]
What a load of rubbish. You have no way of knowing what is going on in peoples mind. The only thing we know for certain about the people that did not vote, is that they did not express their consent to the proposal of the vote. And they are part of the democratic population, by their presence alone, whether they voted or not.
It’s only ‘unfair’ to the minority population (in worst case fifty-fifty) that can’t get their vote pushed through.
You write you don’t want to force people to vote, but you would effectively be forcing people to vote, by threat of exclusion of the democratic population.
Not true. Again, the absence of a vote does not imply a no or yes. It’s just not voting period. They have no opinion or say.
[quote=“Runeforce;92581”][quote=“BlackFro;92556”]People who don’t vote of course are not consenting to VOTE. Therefore they are not a valid vote nor do they apply to the “majority”. The majority rule in democracy refers to the most number of people who VOTED, not the number of people who CAN vote. Totally different.
[/quote]
What a load of rubbish. You have no way of knowing what is going on in peoples mind. The only thing we know for certain about the people that did not vote, is that they did not express their consent to the proposal of the vote. And they are part of the democratic population, by their presence alone, whether they voted or not.
It’s only ‘unfair’ to the minority population (in worst case fifty-fifty) that can’t get their vote pushed through.
You write you don’t want to force people to vote, but you would effectively be forcing people to vote, by threat of exclusion of the democratic population.[/quote]
They did not express their consent to CHOOSE a SIDE.
This doesn’t mean they are not a part of the democratic population, this simply means they didn’t vote on the proposal therefore, they should not be considered in the outcome of the vote.
Do you honestly see how silly you sound?
So If I don’t vote for next years election and trump get’s elected is that “unfair” or “undemocratic”?
No. I chose not to vote, it’s literally the same as voting yes or no. No matter what I do I know the outcome ultimately depends on others then me.
Also the system I’m proposing is not excluding people from the “democratic population”. They had choice if they wanted to vote or not. No one is forcing them to vote just because others can vote yes or no to a proposal.
Again, that’s a very absurd thing to say.
What’s forcing people is when players vote and threaten their teammates to vote unless they will do a hostile action such as leaving, feeding, or being uncooperative.
If it’s changed and non-participants are ignored then people will actually start paying attention to the voting system much like they do in almost every other game I’ve played. Right now many people simply ignore votes going on but if new votes suddenly start mattering participation will go through the roof. However, with this change I’d like to see a ban from calling a vote again for 5 minutes from a person so they can’t spam it or can’t spam it every minute.
In the current system not voting right now equal to no (in both shuffle and kicking). People don’t vote because either 1) they don’t notice the poll starting or 2) they don’t want to change the gamestate and not voting goes in their favor. Changing it solve nothing, people that don’t want to change something will simply start to vote no. That’s why i suggested to make it more noticeable, so category 1 will be reduced.
[quote=“DMaster2;92602”][quote=“BlackFro;92597”]
Not true. Again, the absence of a vote does not imply a no or yes. It’s just not voting period. They have no opinion or say.
[/quote]
In the current system not voting right now equal to no (in both shuffle and kicking). People don’t vote because either 1) they don’t notice the poll starting or 2) they don’t want to change the gamestate and not voting goes in their favor. Changing it solve nothing, people that don’t want to change something will simply start to vote no. That’s why i suggested to make it more noticeable, so category 1 will be reduced.[/quote]
I agree with making the vote more noticeable however you just proved my point even more.
When people don’t vote, that doesn’t inherently mean they disagree. It can be a number of things like the ones listed.
There are only three possible reasons why someone wouldn’t vote in dirty bombs currents system.
Didn’t see it.
Don’t care.
Don’t agree.
It can be any one of these three.
If i missed one please post it.
Not at all. As much as I sympathize with your cause of giving players a more balanced and fun experience, let us not forget that the developers has already attempted to address the issue of team balance in pub matches, in objective mode, in their two latest patches. Something which has received a heap of flak from the community.
Your suggestion is not pragmatic, it is prone to abuse and unfair.
[quote=“BlackFro;92605”]There are only three possible reasons why someone wouldn’t vote in dirty bombs currents system.
Didn’t see it.
Don’t care.
Don’t agree.
It can be any one of these three.
If i missed one please post it.
[/quote]
Meh number 2 seem really strange. I mean it may happen but i see it as a rare thing, especially when a shuffle vote is launched. So rare it shouldn’t really matter anyway. Forcing everyone to vote is pointless imho. But they should make the vote more noticeable so we at least reduce of number of people that completly missed the vote.
Just my thoughts.