Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 11:43:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Gavjack Bunk on 05/05/2010 11:43:59 I've noticed that you only ever pat CMS candidates on the back based on the votes cast and actively abstained, but you don't take into account the other 290 thousand accounts that don't vote.
Is there supposed to be some sort of difference between clicking Abstain, and simply abstaining?
If I passively abstain by genuinely abstaining have I achieved anything? If I actively abstain by fakely abstaining and clicking abstain have I achieved anything?
Why is there even an option to abstain? What's it for?
Is it seriously just to legitimise the %age votes cast as not having to count the ones that didn't vote? Is that seriously it? I cannot think of any other reason other than to make the votes appear relevant. |
Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 11:47:00 -
[2]
It exists to tell CCP that you don't like the concept of the CSM.
In real elections non-voters are treated differently than abstain voters in the calculation (abstains count toward the total, thus when there are abstainers, the other candidates can never get 100% of the vote).
For the CSM I wouldn't know how it influences the calculations.
|
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 12:03:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah It exists to tell CCP that you don't like the concept of the CSM.
I personally interpretted it as "I agree with this process, but dislike these candidates" Whereas actually genuinely abstaining is more of a "I don't care for this process one bit".
Quote:
In real elections non-voters are treated differently than abstain voters in the calculation (abstains count toward the total, thus when there are abstainers, the other candidates can never get 100% of the vote).
"real" elections use various techniques, some people are "really" getting a free holiday, and "really" getting heads up information on upcoming changes that they can't do anything with other than abuse, and they're "really" getting their egos padded beyond all believable bounds, at what point is this not a "real" election?
Quote: For the CSM I wouldn't know how it influences the calculations.
Because getting 16% of the votes cast feels a lot better than 0.0016% votes of the voting population, and it looks better in the media for CCP.
If all of these irrelevant websites that keep giving irrelevant awards and irrelevant kudos editorials to CCP for granting us a weak CSM ever tell the truth about how important the CSM is however, they get no more advertising revenue from CCP.
Damm marketing departments. |
Nicholas Barker
Black Nova Corp IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 12:05:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk some people are "really" getting a free holiday, and "really" getting heads up information on upcoming changes that they can't do anything with other than abuse, and they're "really" getting their egos padded beyond all believable bounds
haha, i never thought of it like that.
Well, maybe the free holiday did cross my mind.
------
0800-LAG-A-NODE
|
|
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 12:07:00 -
[5]
thirty two point fifty nine percent.
Secure 3rd party service | my in-game channel 'Holy Veldspar' |
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 12:38:00 -
[6]
EVE is set in the distant future. By that point only 0.01% of people will vote in elections. Everyone is just roleplaying postmodern apathy. -
DesuSigs - Now with ThreadAssignÖ |
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 13:06:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Crumplecorn EVE is set in the distant future. By that point only 0.01% of people will vote in elections. Everyone is just roleplaying postmodern apathy.
ahh because the elected officials are merely figureheads and puppets, dancing to a tune strummed out by invisible masters... self serving and unfeeling.... I see where you're going with this... no matter what you do.... it will be as though you did nothing at all.... |
Swiftgaze
Elysium Trading Company Elysium Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 13:23:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Originally by: Crumplecorn EVE is set in the distant future. By that point only 0.01% of people will vote in elections. Everyone is just roleplaying postmodern apathy.
ahh because the elected officials are merely figureheads and puppets, dancing to a tune strummed out by invisible masters... self serving and unfeeling.... I see where you're going with this... no matter what you do.... it will be as though you did nothing at all....
No, he said that the voter participation is dwindling. :P VOTE CAT
ELYSIUM VOTES CAT |
Praesentius
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 13:56:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Praesentius on 05/05/2010 13:56:21 Is anyone else surprised that the isk farmers haven't voted for themselves a couple thousand times? |
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 14:05:00 -
[10]
Don't vote: You agree with everything that is done. Vote for abstain: Disagree with everything that is done.
If abstain gets more votes than all candidates combined, CCP will be forced to reconsider the CSM and its implementation. --------
|
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive The Obsidian Legion
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 14:18:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Is there supposed to be some sort of difference between clicking Abstain, and simply abstaining?
If I passively abstain by genuinely abstaining have I achieved anything? If I actively abstain by fakely abstaining and clicking abstain have I achieved anything?
I think the biggest difference is that there's no way to tell with the passive folks if they actually intended to abstain or were prevented from casting a ballot by outside influences (especially seeing as this is a game, sometimes RL rears its ugly head and gets in the way).
So consider this - Voter 1 wanted to vote, but couldn't because, for instance, he was in the hospital for the duration, whereas Voter 2 actually voted to abstain.
Which one do you, as the vote counter, have real factual information about their true intentions on?
Failure to cast a vote is not the same as voting to abstain. --Vel
Originally by: Jiseinoku
Mining is the path to enlightement.
|
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 14:41:00 -
[12]
Originally by: De'Veldrin
Failure to cast a vote is not the same as voting to abstain.
Yes I know. I want to know why CCP make the differentiation though. I suspect though it's simply to make the CSM look legitiamte, by increasing the scores of the candidates.
Hundreds of thousands of accounts don't vote. They're not all in hospital. But I rather suspect there is an answer that CCP, the marketing boys, the candidiates and the rabid fanboiz just don't want to even consider, that it's all just pointless bull****. |
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 14:51:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Praesentius Edited by: Praesentius on 05/05/2010 13:56:21 Is anyone else surprised that the isk farmers haven't voted for themselves a couple thousand times?
If the ISK farmers put themselves forward as CSM, I think you'd see some sick censorship coming out of Iceland faster than a stolen Dramiel. |
Blane Xero
Amarr The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 14:52:00 -
[14]
They make the differentiation because not everyone who plays EVE even understands what the CSM is; and they aren't voting not because they are abstaining, but because they're simply playing the game as a casual player. _____________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Originally by: CCP Fallout :facepalm:
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 14:53:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Crumplecorn on 05/05/2010 14:53:14
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk that it's all just pointless bull****.
It doesn't become pointless just because some people choose not to vote, it just becomes overly sensitive to minority viewpoints.
And since that minority is the one which cares enough to vote, that isn't a bad thing. -
DesuSigs - Now with ThreadAssignÖ |
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 15:03:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Blane Xero They make the differentiation because not everyone who plays EVE even understands what the CSM is; and they aren't voting not because they are abstaining, but because they're simply playing the game as a casual player.
So education is the problem? |
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 15:12:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Crumplecorn Edited by: Crumplecorn on 05/05/2010 14:53:14
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk that it's all just pointless bull****.
It doesn't become pointless just because some people choose not to vote, it just becomes overly sensitive to minority viewpoints.
And since that minority is the one which cares enough to vote, that isn't a bad thing.
Empowering minorities to decide for majorities has historically been a road to ruin. Fortunately the CSM is a toothless ***** cat of free holidays and heads up info to selected lucky individuals to abuse as they see fit.
On the evidence of the CSM useful output and guidance so far, I suppose I should be thankful they didn't give us the hard as nails CSM we were promised, it would have made T20 look like the irrelevant drop in the ocean that it probably was. |
Blane Xero
Amarr The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 15:15:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Originally by: Blane Xero They make the differentiation because not everyone who plays EVE even understands what the CSM is; and they aren't voting not because they are abstaining, but because they're simply playing the game as a casual player.
So education is the problem?
Not really. Some people play EVE to ... *gasp* ... Play eve. Not have to trawl through candidate website after candidate website or get caught up in the goings on of something that isn't directly related to having fun playing Eve. _____________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Originally by: CCP Fallout :facepalm:
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 15:15:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk Empowering minorities to decide for majorities has historically been a road to ruin.
It's a video game, not a government. There's no harm in letting those with a greater interest in it control it. This is how it works anyway, with CCP having dictatorial control. -
DesuSigs - Now with ThreadAssignÖ |
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 16:06:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Crumplecorn It's a video game, not a government.
I challenge you to find where I said it was a government. Don't duck it and reply with a soundbite.
Originally by: Crumplecorn There's no harm in letting those with a greater interest in it control it. This is how it works anyway, with CCP having dictatorial control.
I challenge you find where I said the CSM controls anything. Don't duck it and reply with a soundbite.
Oh, just duck it and reply with a soundbite.
Do you know why they don't count genuine abstainers by the way? That was what I wanted to know, I'm not all that interested in your empowered minority fantasies as it happens. |
|
Gunnanmon
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 16:15:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Praesentius Edited by: Praesentius on 05/05/2010 13:56:21 Is anyone else surprised that the isk farmers haven't voted for themselves a couple thousand times?
Presumably they haven't included that into their macro yet. Signature locked for discussing moderation. Navigator
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 16:18:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk I challenge you to find where I said it was a government.
To what history were you referring then? Whatever it was, I doubt it was the history of games' player councils. Correct me if I am wrong though.
Originally by: Crumplecorn I challenge you find where I said the CSM controls anything.
Neither of us mentioned the actual level of control the CSM exerts. Who's ducking now?
Originally by: Crumplecorn Do you know why they don't count genuine abstainers by the way? That was what I wanted to know, I'm not all that interested in your empowered minority fantasies as it happens.
And yet you respond. -
DesuSigs - Now with ThreadAssignÖ |
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 18:16:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Crumplecorn
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk I challenge you to find where I said it was a government.
To what history were you referring then? Whatever it was, I doubt it was the history of games' player councils. Correct me if I am wrong though.
Originally by: Crumplecorn I challenge you find where I said the CSM controls anything.
Neither of us mentioned the actual level of control the CSM exerts. Who's ducking now?
Originally by: Crumplecorn Do you know why they don't count genuine abstainers by the way? That was what I wanted to know, I'm not all that interested in your empowered minority fantasies as it happens.
And yet you respond.
CCP Approved Troll wins. He wins all arguments through trolling longer than I'm prepared to shoot his **** down. Congratulations on well thought out reasoning. If in future you'd like to stay on topic, you may in the future get responses.
|
Colonel Fault
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 18:25:00 -
[24]
I'm just voting Cat for fun anyway, did think about absteining.
|
RentableMuffin
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 05:16:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Colonel Fault I'm just voting Cat for fun anyway, did think about absteining.
me too, I hope cat wins!
and lol, way to over analyze Crumplecorn's post
|
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 09:42:00 -
[26]
Originally by: RentableMuffin
Originally by: Colonel Fault I'm just voting Cat for fun anyway, did think about absteining.
me too, I hope cat wins!
and lol, way to over analyze Crumplecorn's post
As he's a recognised long standing CCP approved troll, I should have ignored him much earlier. Perhaps if everybody did it would be much better... but he gave the slowies some pretty sigs to clone... an instant ++ in the fanboi slowmind. Rest assured, I shall be ignoring his absolute ****e quite expertly in the future. |
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 10:02:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk CCP Approved Troll wins. He wins all arguments through trolling longer than I'm prepared to shoot his **** down. Congratulations on well thought out reasoning. If in future you'd like to stay on topic, you may in the future get responses.
[...]
As he's a recognised long standing CCP approved troll, I should have ignored him much earlier. Perhaps if everybody did it would be much better... but he gave the slowies some pretty sigs to clone... an instant ++ in the fanboi slowmind. Rest assured, I shall be ignoring his absolute ****e quite expertly in the future.
<3 you too.
Bonus points for more creative than usual assertions/ad hominems. 'CCP approved', ha ha, quite the imagination. Though calling me a troll is conversely quite unimaginative.
You should loosen the tinfoil hat, it's making your eyes water. -
DesuSigs - Now with ThreadAssignÖ and SigSelectÖ |
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 11:22:00 -
[28]
So, anybody isn't a troll know why CCP only count active abstains as abstains and counts the genuine abstains as worthless statistical interference? |
Manczech
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 11:27:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Crumplecorn And since that minority is the one which cares enough to vote, that isn't a bad thing.
If engaging a minority is the objective, that's true.
If it's supposed to accomplish anything else, it looks pretty fail. |
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 11:33:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Manczech If engaging a minority is the objective, that's true.
The objective is to allow player concerns and feedback to affect the game; if those who have concerns or have feedback to offer (i.e. those who bother to read/post/vote) are in a minority, then it can be said that the objective is to engage that minority. -
DesuSigs - Now with ThreadAssignÖ and SigSelectÖ |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |