Article

With barely an hour left until voting starts, here is May's Congressional Peer Review!

As requested in the previous (and first) edition of the CPR, I've fashioned a scale of scoring. As seems only fitting, since I am the collector of this data and the creator of this review, I've dubbed it the BAAROGUE scale! As you'll see below, most members of congress were only able to reach a 3 or 4 on the BAAROGUE scale, while I reached FULL BAAROGUE! And if that wasn't enough to convince; due to my unique name I was the ONLY ONE able to truthfully answer the question "Who are you?" with "Baarogue", granting me a final bonus point! Clearly, I am the most BAAROGUE of our current congress. I only ask that any voters reading this keep that in mind when they go to the polls.



Oh, alright. Here is the real, BORING results of Congressional Peer Review for the term ending May 2012

I began this survey last month with the intention of encouraging a cooperative and constructive atmosphere in Congress, and hopefully inform party leadership and voters about the players they've elected - and might elect again.

How knowledgeable (or willing to learn) was each other member of Congress?
Knowledge of game mechanics and Congressional actions and procedure are what you're grading here.
- N/A, Did Not Participate means they didn't join in on the forums.
- Apathetic or Ignorant would be those who participated on the forums but appeared disinterested in learning their job, Congressional procedure, or the game mechanics involved with Congress.
- Quick Learner is anyone who showed obvious improvement in their term.
- Experienced Lurker would be those who appeared to know what they're doing but didn't share their knowledge or participate in educating the newcomers.
- Speaker's Pet would be those who were active in educating others and constructive during discussion.



How active, cooperative, and constructive was each other member of Congress?
Participation in discussion is what you're grading.
- N/A = Same as above.
- Antagonistic would describe those who only disrupted discussion or were needlessly hostile to other members of Congress.
- Quantity Over Quality is for those who post frequently, but are lacking in content.
- More Helpful Than Not is for members who you might not have always agreed with, but you'll fight to the death for their right to be wrong.
- Super Senator should be picked for those for whom you stand in awe of their activity levels and cooperative nature.



As requested, I've assigned a point value to each response. A simple value of 0-4 seemed appropriate. Totalled and listed in order by score:

Baarogue 59
Pfeiffer 57
Abroham Lincoln 51
Astra Kat G 51
Molly Emma 51
★ Snowball the Dinosaur 51
NathanP 50
sheepshag 41
American_insurgent 38
Little Benny 34
★ logomaster304 27
grim the reaper 24
Machiezmo 21
msrainysunday 11
Cruciator 11
Losan33 4
Stormin 1
mrchenghaoyu 1

There were 9 respondents again this month, and they were ★ Snowball the Dinosaur , Molly Emma , Little Benny , NathanP , American_insurgent , Astra Kat G , sheepshag , Pfeiffer , and myself, Baarogue .

Once again, I hope this has been a helpful resource to inform voters and party leaders about the players they're electing. Thank you for reading!

Previous article:
A Month of (Too?) Many Hats (1 year ago)

next article:
Congress in June! (11 months ago)

Comments(7)