@mironova_e i’m not a specialist in politics, the main idea for me is to have reps that form a swiss comittee, these reps talk to the club and make informations travels.
If clubs / rep want to count each individual voices and report them why not but i’m sure there is pro and con in each other system, see the Miguel comment about having smaller clubs having near to zero weight in the discussion.
Your exemple looks a bit problematic to me: like 4 of 6 clubs wants X but for voices it’s Y that is voted, i guess it depends on how you see the swiss community, if you see it as a big 100 players group or if you see it as smaller communities.
Is it not in Swiss votations populaires individual votes and cantons votes are taken into consideration ?
Maybe we should count indiv. votes + clubs votes then ask ChatGPT !
That say, we are like 4,5 clubs in Switzerland, and maybe 37,5 players so if rep wants to count and report voice i personally wont argue 3 weeks on this matter.
This just needs to be voted, each club have a voice :)
Fine for me.
In my opinion we just have to prevent ind. players fills the final google doc.
To avoid “magic” new member and stuff like that it really needs to be the responsibility of the club rep to count ind. voices and put them into the google doc (or here in the forum). All open and all public.
Main idea for me, i repeat, is to have club rep that form a semblance of swiss committee that can make the information travel, and travel safely and openly.
Of course voting count system should be set before the result of the vote.
Btw i asked chatgpt because i’m a shit, referendum and initiave populaires needs to have the double majority = individual voices + canton majority. So maybe we need also this to have the perfect system ?
So voices + clubs majority to have a modification ?
I guess it’s a good way, and not only the “pure math” system, honestly i feel there’s something wrong not valued club specific needs / proposal in favor of pure maths blending system.
You called for the swiss system !
That is fine for me too. It reflects that we are one big community which is divided in smaller sub-communities. So it takes the advantages (or disadvantages?) of both systems.
Lausanne voted for the club vote btw (4 votes for club vote, 0 for individual vote, 1 “whatever”). but we didn’t talk about the mixed solution yet.
Should we vote to check if the mixed solution is fine for everybody? (I’d propose we just vote and count individual as well as club votes and hope that both give the same result )
As soo as we have decided on that question we can talk about the swiss champs format/ organization
Double majority (individual + club must accept the proposal)
Swiss champ location ?
So far only one bid/ proposal from Lausanne
Format ?
3v3
4v4
5v5
Mixed ?
1.Mandatory?
2. Favorited : more chance to be drafted if team are mixed ? Make not much sens in Switzerland cause we likely won’t have any waiting list for the champ, I think (based on past year experience)
3. Status quo (same as before)