Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 139 posts

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#51

Post by kemiller »

cheald wrote: post #26

Wow, that infographic is misleading. http://cl.ly/image/2n1H2Q0z1919 They quote that "162 responses" number right after saying "petitions must receive 100k signatures", when none of those responded to had to have received 100k signatures. Additionally, 2.1 million signatures (responded to) divided by 162 petitions (responded to) is an average of 12,963 signatures per petition. The largest petition ever - obviously an…

Once a given petition crosses the threshold, there is much less pressure to recruit more signatures. Without data on the rate of new signers before and after the threshold, I can't prove it, but I'd bet this will not stop serious petitions.

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#52

Post by afarrell »

samstave wrote: post #36

I'm of the opinion that this is in direct response to how quickly 25,000 signatures were raised to fire Ortiz. How would they like it if the citizens of the US took the same tact: "Hey Obama administration, I'd like to inform you that I am choosing a different tax bracket arbitrarily with the same level of authority as you show me respect as a citizen."

"This new threshold applies only to petitions created from this point forward and is not retroactively applied to ones that already exist."

So this will have no affect on the Ortiz petition.

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#53

Post by miked »

rprasad wrote: post #35
mtgx wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that doesn't mean republics can't have more direct democracy elements in them. For example I love the idea of citizens being able to create a referendum (in a certain state, I believe) in Germany. You still have a threshold, so people don't start creating one for all sorts of crazy ideas, but this is a great example of how citizens can help improve the laws in their countries. I think this referendum is usually a…

For conflicting evidence, I would point to the California initiative process, which is the reason California's government is nonfunctional and almost bankrupt right now.

California's government is nonfunctional and almost bankrupt right now because California is a One-Party State, and that party likes to buy itself votes with other people's money and then get people like you to blame everything wrong on someone else.

Give the Entitled Party credit: they've destroyed the state's finacial situation, but hey, they've got a total lock on the state. So its all been a big success on the one thing that counts.

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#54

Post by waterlesscloud »

rprasad wrote: post #32

The Death Star petition and the Piers Morgan petition were the straws that broke the camel's back, according to a friend in the WH PR dept.

They're fooling themselves if they imagine 100k will stop annoying petitions that 25k wouldn't stop. That's a blindness to the dynamics of how these things work.

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#55

Post by milesf »

samstave wrote: post #36

I'm of the opinion that this is in direct response to how quickly 25,000 signatures were raised to fire Ortiz. How would they like it if the citizens of the US took the same tact: "Hey Obama administration, I'd like to inform you that I am choosing a different tax bracket arbitrarily with the same level of authority as you show me respect as a citizen."

Or maybe it was in response to the petition to build a Death Star =]

petition: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/secure-resources-a...

response: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/isnt-petition-resp...

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#56

Post by cheald »

anigbrowl wrote: post #48
cheald wrote: post #26

Wow, that infographic is misleading. http://cl.ly/image/2n1H2Q0z1919 They quote that "162 responses" number right after saying "petitions must receive 100k signatures", when none of those responded to had to have received 100k signatures. Additionally, 2.1 million signatures (responded to) divided by 162 petitions (responded to) is an average of 12,963 signatures per petition. The largest petition ever - obviously an…

Additionally, 2.1 million signatures (responded to) divided by 162 petitions (responded to) is an average of 12,963 signatures per petition. That assumes people only sign one petition. I bet you could find plenty of people who have put their names to 5 or 10 petitions right here on HN. Also, when you looka t the other petitions, it's obvious that a lot of them are a) duplicative b) bullshit and c) ignorant - like ask…

Good catch on the multi-signatures. That would tend to suggest a higher number of signatures per petition, but even in that case, we're talking about an average of ~13,000 people engaged per successful petition.

I totally agree that there needs to be a filter against teh dumb (because the average citizen has an appallingly tenuous grasp of the basics of US civics), but it seems like all that this does is increase incentive to trump up phantom(/spam/falsified) support for a petition, rather than actually improving engagement with constituents and giving them a voice.

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#58

Post by zainny »

cheald wrote: post #26

Wow, that infographic is misleading. http://cl.ly/image/2n1H2Q0z1919 They quote that "162 responses" number right after saying "petitions must receive 100k signatures", when none of those responded to had to have received 100k signatures. Additionally, 2.1 million signatures (responded to) divided by 162 petitions (responded to) is an average of 12,963 signatures per petition. The largest petition ever - obviously an…

There is one important number missing from the infographics in this blog post.

Difference Made: 0

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#59

Post by waqf »

afarrell wrote: post #52
samstave wrote: post #36

I'm of the opinion that this is in direct response to how quickly 25,000 signatures were raised to fire Ortiz. How would they like it if the citizens of the US took the same tact: "Hey Obama administration, I'd like to inform you that I am choosing a different tax bracket arbitrarily with the same level of authority as you show me respect as a citizen."

"This new threshold applies only to petitions created from this point forward and is not retroactively applied to ones that already exist." So this will have no affect on the Ortiz petition.

effect

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#60

Post by samstave »

afarrell wrote: post #52
samstave wrote: post #36

I'm of the opinion that this is in direct response to how quickly 25,000 signatures were raised to fire Ortiz. How would they like it if the citizens of the US took the same tact: "Hey Obama administration, I'd like to inform you that I am choosing a different tax bracket arbitrarily with the same level of authority as you show me respect as a citizen."

"This new threshold applies only to petitions created from this point forward and is not retroactively applied to ones that already exist." So this will have no affect on the Ortiz petition.

I'm not saying it would have effect on it - but rather, an important step in quashing such actions in the future.

"Oh shit! look how easy that 25K for Ortiz was! We learned our lesson! let's up it to make it 4X as difficult to force us to issue a statement informing the populous that they have no voice!"

Thanks Waqf

Post reply on HN