Naming the sim — next stage: vo (citizens, read your email

[Gwyneth Llewelyn]

Hello all,

You should just have received the following email from Salzie Sachertorte.

Without further ado, per NL 4-27(5) On the seventh day after passage, the SC will email a list of all submitted names to all citizens.

[... proposed names sent by email ...]

Once again, please keep this list private so we don't have any domain squatting.

The Next Step:

Per NL 4-27(6). Each citizen shall then submit a ranked list of his/her top five names (at most) for each contest in the manner outlined in section 3.

A citizen may rank fewer than five names if he/she so chooses. Names shall be given points as follows:

1 ranking= five points
2 " four points
3 " three points
4 " two points
5 " one point
unranked - zero points

Citizens must submit their ranked lists by the end of the tenth day following passage. Votes are to be kept anonymous by the SC.

This is being distributed on June 12, therefore, the cutoff for submitting your choices is June 14th.

Per NL-4-27(3) ....Names shall be submitted to any voting member of the SC via email, IM or notecard. Names shall not be submitted on the forums or via other public posting.

Please submit your rankings to:

The members of the SC are:
Gwyneth Llewelyn [email protected]
Dianne Mechanique [email protected]
Diderot Mirabeau [email protected]

What's next?

Quoting the rest of NL 4-27

7. After the close of ranking, the SC will submit privately to the RA the five names from each list with the highest point total. Names with equal numbers of points will be ranked alphabetically but the list given to the RA must carry no indication of this ranking and the ordering will therefore be alphabetical.

8. The RA shall meet in closed session no later than 17 days following the passage of the bill to vote on the winning name from the entity ranked list based on the criteria in section 2. The result of the vote will be submitted to the SC.
The RA shall meet in closed session to vote on the winning name for the sim naming based on the section 2 criteria. The result of the vote shall be submitted to the SC.

9. If a majority cannot be established within the RA in favour of a particular name on a list then the SC determines the name with the highest total number of points on the list as the winner. Should there be more than one name with the highest number of points, the SC will ask the guildmaster to choose a random number between 1 and x where x is the number of names on the list with the highest number of points. The name on the list with a position corresponding to the number chosen by the guildmaster will be the winning name.

10. Once the wining names have been determined the SC is authorised to register the relevant internet-domain(s) and apply to Linden Lab for a change of sim name. A sum of money equal to L$19000 will be allocated to that effect.

11. After the completion of each naming process , including domain registration and sim renaming if appropriate, the SC will announce in the forum the new name along with the complete lists of names participating in the respective competition and their score.

[Gwyneth Llewelyn]

Here are the voting results for the new name.

The RA picked "Neufreistadt" for the sim and "Confederation of Democratic Simulators" for the over-arching government.

for sim name:

1) Freistadt - 50 points
2) Neufreistadt - 39 points
3) Volksburg - 39 points
4) Neualtenburg - 37 points
5) Wolkenstadt - 20 points
6) Liebesburg - 13 points
7) Bergburg - 7 points

(all others no votes)

for project name:

1) Virtual Democratic Confederation - 35 points
2) Confederation of Democratic Simulators - 30 points
3) Virtual Federal Republic - 22 points
4) Democratic Republic of Neualtenburg - 21 points
5) Federation of Democratic Republics - 20 points
6) Democratic Republic of Virtunesia - 18 points
7) Free Confederation of Democratic States - 15 points
Democratic Republic of Primaveria - 11 points
9) Republic of Second Life - 11 points

[Diderot Mirabeau]

This just to announce that upon consultation between the members of the SC it was discovered that one vote had not been taken account of in the count. The vote was lost as a notecard in an inventory of 2,500+ objects but has been taken account of in this latest recount.

The Dean of the SC has considered two issues in extension of the discovery of this anomaly:

1) Whether the anomaly merited an annulment of the procedure as already executed
2) Whether the anomaly should have any consequences for the responsible chair in question

With respect to issue #1 it was decided that there was no need for an annulment since the newly discovered vote did not change which five names were placed in the top-5 for either list - it simply affected the internal ranking of the names within the top-5. However, as the RA was at no point made aware of the relative scores or ranking of the names with which they were presented there is no way which this difference could have had an influence on the RA.

The revised scores are as follows:
1) Freistadt - 54 points
2) Neualtenburg - 42 points
3) Volksburg - 42 points
4) Neufreistadt - 39 points
5) Wolkenstadt - 20 points
6) Liebesburg - 15 points
7) Bergburg - 7 points
(all others no votes)

for project name
1) Virtual Democratic Confederation - 37 points
2) Confederation of Democratic Simulators - 30 points
3) Democratic Republic of Neualtenburg - 26 points
4) Federation of Democratic Republics - 23 points
5) Virtual Federal Republic - 22 points
6) Democratic republic of Virtunesia - 20 points
7) Free Confederation of Democratic States - 15 points
Democratic Republic of Primaveria - 14 points
9) Republic of Second Life - 11 points

On the question of issue #2 - whether the lack of oversight should have any individual consequences - it should be noted that the responsible chair offered to resign from his seat but it was decided that this was not necessary considering in part the fact that the anomaly had no influence on the election outcome and that there was no malicious intent or attempt to hide the mistake behind the error. A resignation was therefore deemed to not be necessary.

I deserves to be emphasised once more that these results are not truly important, since, although the ranking changed, the RA never saw the original rankings anyway, and would have picked exactly the same results. At this stage, we only felt that the public should know what the correct results were, for an historical background.

Finally, the SC wishes to apologise for using a "manual" system of vote counting. This arises from the fact that the voting had to take place at an accellerated pace due to circumstances outside of our control. Based on our experience it is the judgement of the SC that voting by
notecard is definitely not the best way to do these things, and we will in the future rely upon alternative systems (probably tied to in-
world voting booths or similar devices) instead, where the human
error is more likely to be avoided.