Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Bel Amar
Sudden Buggery
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 08:58:00 -
[31] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:imho, the only CSM model that can represent the entire Eve playerbase has to be based on representative boundaries.
Pff. I live in Wormholes, and they've given EVE new life for me. But they're also full of many risk averse PvE types who don't represent my interests in the slightest, so you can keep that idea.
And wormholes are a part of the game. I don't want it to be the basis of why someone is elected. I vote for people based on whether I believe their "whole of game" philosophy matches mine, not whether they're weekend warriors focused on a particular area of the game
|
Thorn Galen
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
92
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 09:06:00 -
[32] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Why don't we just stop the pretense and ask those already in the CSM if they would like to continue for another year, if they say yes, then great, if not then hold elections for those empty chairs.
Why am I saying this, because if those currently in the CSM want to stay, they will.
Why will they, because they are able to gather enough block votes to stay in power.
That is not a bad thing, its just life, many would say its just politics.
The only reason the Mittani would no longer be the Chairman of the CSM is if
1. He quits
2. He severely, massively, we are talking the mother ****** of NDA breaches
3. The World comes to an end
So lets stop the messing about, the pointless threads, the wasted time in the elections and blah blah blah.
^^This x 100 Regardless of feelings about Goons, The Mittani is producing results. The CSM must produce results - it is. End of story, I don't give a damn about who is in which alliance, I just want to see the CSM act on behalf of players for the betterment of Eve. That is exactly what is happening. If you're butthurt about personal issues against any alliance members, that's your problem.
I would rather see action as it is happening than mere words.
The universe is an ancient desert, a vast wasteland with only occasional habitable planets as oases. We Fremen, comfortable with deserts, shall now venture into another. - STILGAR, From the Sietch to the Stars. |
Prince Kobol
55
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 10:02:00 -
[33] - Quote
Cedille Mureau wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:Why don't we just stop the pretense and ask those already in the CSM if they would like to continue for another year, if they say yes, then great, if not then hold elections for those empty chairs.
Why am I saying this, because if those currently in the CSM want to stay, they will.
Why will they, because they are able to gather enough block votes to stay in power.
That is not a bad thing, its just life, many would say its just politics.
The only reason the Mittani would no longer be the Chairman of the CSM is if
1. He quits
2. He severely, massively, we are talking the mother ****** of NDA breaches
3. The World comes to an end
So lets stop the messing about, the pointless threads, the wasted time in the elections and blah blah blah. I'm sure that Bashar el Assad and Kim Jong Il would whole heartedly agree with your views.
lol. you are so missing the point
As I said before, the only way the current CSM will be removed is if they they step down.
They can not be voted out because they are able to get large majority block voting from their respected alliances / allies.
This is how politics works, love it or hate it, this is the way of things.
There is perhaps only 1 or 2 players in Eve who would be able to counter this but that is it.
On top of that whether you like them personally or not, this current CSM appears to have lite of fire under CCP's collective asses which is great.
Do I like the Mittani personally, can't say as I have never met him.
Will I judge a person by their Internet Persona.. hell no.
Will I judge him on their results, yes and so far so good.
I couldn't give a **** whether his internet persona is one of a lying manipulative egocentric bastard, so long as they get the job done great.
I do not see the point of having time wasted on a election where unless they step down, they will win again.
So far they are doing a good job, let them continue with it |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
643
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 10:07:00 -
[34] - Quote
Fortune Taker wrote:wait a minute! When the hell was the vote? I never got a ballot.
i think the problem is there is no quick link on the eve front page that takes you to the voting
also where the hell is the link to get to the main site from evegate?
Uhm, the CSM elections are all over the front page of the EVE site, while they're running, and you get a log-in message from the game client as well. Plus the forums are covered in election stuff. I'm not sure how much more you could want? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
643
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 10:51:00 -
[35] - Quote
Incidentally, another objection to Apostles "regional representation" gerrymander is that it would be comically easy to manipulate by any large, well-organised group. Since there's no "residency" qualification, anyone can say that they're a Caldari resident or an Amarr resident or whatever. Unless you're going to impose an unbearable administrative burden on CCP by having them individually audit each account for activity - and even that could be manipulated.
Read here for some pointers on how this system would easily be exploited: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotten_boroughs
Apostles proposal would in all probability deliver even more CSM control to mittens.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Skunk Gracklaw
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
139
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 10:55:00 -
[36] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Incidentally, another objection to Apostles "regional representation" gerrymander is that it would be comically easy to manipulate by any large, well-organised group. Since there's no "residency" qualification, anyone can say that they're a Caldari resident or an Amarr resident or whatever. Unless you're going to impose an unbearable administrative burden on CCP by having them individually audit each account for activity - and even that could be manipulated. Read here for some pointers on how this system would easily be exploited: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotten_boroughsApostles proposal would in all probability deliver even more CSM control to mittens. You shouldn't respond with all this logic and reason. It will just encourage him to come up with even loonier stuff. |
shellree
Panty Hamsters
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 11:04:00 -
[37] - Quote
tbh there is so much wrong with the csm it really should be disbanded. lets start off with power blocks. it shouldnt happen, ccp alwos these large alliance to run because of the ammount of player base they "speak" for. well they dont speak for me or anyone else not in thier alliance. CCP employees should also not be allowed to be in alliances that have elected csm members in it. THIS IS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.... AND TECHNICALLY INSIDER TRADING. how do i figure? im glad you asked. well all know the rep of some alliances and we know they will do anything to stay ahead or on top. so tell me this do you actually think they dont go back to said alliances and say hey everyone hope on vent,ts3,skype w/e and spill the details of csm=patch's coming soon... we are seeing it now btw with the oxytopes. long story short no csm member should be allowed back to back terms and no more then 3 terms in 5 years then you cant be elected again for 4 years. this would help clean corruption from the csm. there is a member on the csm now that has been there for four years back to back, do you honestly think he doesnt have more of a personal relationship with ccp. esp since ccp employees are in his allinace.....
think about what you all are doing to this game buy selling your votes or just voting for who ever looks cool. EVE IS REAL.
did i do it right? |
Nariya Kentaya
Celestial Ascension
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 11:11:00 -
[38] - Quote
pussnheels wrote:Feligast wrote:pussnheels wrote:main problem what i have with the elections is the fact that less than 18% of the playerbase actually voted , Because of these low voters turn out it can be rigged easily , hence the 2 goons in the current CSM
While I applaud what you're trying to do, explain to me how 82% of the playerbase not voting = "rigged" what i mean by rigged is the following Even tho i despise you Goons , i do admire the way you guys pull together i don't think there is any other alliance that can rely on a loyal core of members like the goons So with 7000 members when even 1/2 of them vote with all their second or third account you already have a large percentage of the voters turnpout So i am not saying your CSM delegates cheated not at all , But it is relative easy with such turnout to manipulate the results
ok, so your saying that if ONLY democrats vote in the 2012 election and a DEMOCRAT gets elected, somehow the democrats manipulated the results? maybe the reason it HAPPENED was that the only people who cared enough to vote were goons, who OBVIOUSLY would vote for a goon. |
Prince Kobol
55
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 11:16:00 -
[39] - Quote
shellree wrote:tbh there is so much wrong with the csm it really should be disbanded. lets start off with power blocks. it shouldnt happen, ccp alwos these large alliance to run because of the ammount of player base they "speak" for. well they dont speak for me or anyone else not in thier alliance. CCP employees should also not be allowed to be in alliances that have elected csm members in it. THIS IS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.... AND TECHNICALLY INSIDER TRADING. how do i figure? im glad you asked. well all know the rep of some alliances and we know they will do anything to stay ahead or on top. so tell me this do you actually think they dont go back to said alliances and say hey everyone hope on vent,ts3,skype w/e and spill the details of csm=patch's coming soon... we are seeing it now btw with the oxytopes. long story short no csm member should be allowed back to back terms and no more then 3 terms in 5 years then you cant be elected again for 4 years. this would help clean corruption from the csm. there is a member on the csm now that has been there for four years back to back, do you honestly think he doesnt have more of a personal relationship with ccp. esp since ccp employees are in his allinace.....
think about what you all are doing to this game buy selling your votes or just voting for who ever looks cool. EVE IS REAL.
did i do it right?
hmm please tell me this is a joke? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
643
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 11:40:00 -
[40] - Quote
Skunk Gracklaw wrote:Malcanis wrote:Incidentally, another objection to Apostles "regional representation" gerrymander is that it would be comically easy to manipulate by any large, well-organised group. Since there's no "residency" qualification, anyone can say that they're a Caldari resident or an Amarr resident or whatever. Unless you're going to impose an unbearable administrative burden on CCP by having them individually audit each account for activity - and even that could be manipulated. Read here for some pointers on how this system would easily be exploited: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotten_boroughsApostles proposal would in all probability deliver even more CSM control to mittens. You shouldn't respond with all this logic and reason. It will just encourage him to come up with even loonier stuff.
What you see as a disadvantage, I see as delightful, low-cost entertainment, as well as an opportunity to give some of the less politically sophisticated players a chance to see these ancient fallacies at work. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
Zey Nadar
Aliastra Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 18:56:00 -
[41] - Quote
Thorn Galen wrote: Regardless of feelings about Goons, The Mittani is producing results.
Ive yet to see any results explicitly attributed to him |
Nariya Kentaya
Celestial Ascension
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 19:04:00 -
[42] - Quote
Zey Nadar wrote:Thorn Galen wrote: Regardless of feelings about Goons, The Mittani is producing results.
Ive yet to see any results explicitly attributed to him
ice is profitable enough to mine in galente now? i'd say that is a result, and the sudden drop of available hulks has also helped my indy-friend in his hulk-manufacturing business. |
Nerdy Deadshot
In The Goo EVE Trade Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 21:06:00 -
[43] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:imho, the only CSM model that can represent the entire Eve playerbase has to be based on representative boundaries.
Admittedly, highseccers are going to have trouble fielding a rep because they don't play as a collective. In my mind, that's their problem and it just needs someone with drive/motivation to make it happen. It would still only be one voice so he needs to be good.
But certainly low sec and 0.0 need to be proportionally represented regardless. And it's "proportionally" that's critical.
We also need to have maximum terms to I think. Polarisation of the current CSM is all too obvious. Not their fault but an issue nonetheless.
That's my 2 bits.....
Hi sec has incursions bring together pilots... I can think of a few prominent individuals in incursions that I would vote for.
|
Nariya Kentaya
Celestial Ascension
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 21:24:00 -
[44] - Quote
Nerdy Deadshot wrote:The Apostle wrote:imho, the only CSM model that can represent the entire Eve playerbase has to be based on representative boundaries.
Admittedly, highseccers are going to have trouble fielding a rep because they don't play as a collective. In my mind, that's their problem and it just needs someone with drive/motivation to make it happen. It would still only be one voice so he needs to be good.
But certainly low sec and 0.0 need to be proportionally represented regardless. And it's "proportionally" that's critical.
We also need to have maximum terms to I think. Polarisation of the current CSM is all too obvious. Not their fault but an issue nonetheless.
That's my 2 bits..... Hi sec has incursions bring together pilots... I can think of a few prominent individuals in incursions that I would vote for.
yeah i hear that sansha is a great leader! never heard a sansha complain about his leadership. |
Dunbar Hulan
The Flaming Sideburn's Art of War Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 21:55:00 -
[45] - Quote
Lets be honest, we should just bin the current bunch of CSM's. The CSM model got corrupted the minute the Goons/PL/Brick squad got their hands on it. The EVE player communities wishes and concerns are subservient to the wishes of the current CSM make up. That's just the reality of it. There it is. |
Nariya Kentaya
Celestial Ascension
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 22:01:00 -
[46] - Quote
Dunbar Hulan wrote:Lets be honest, we should just bin the current bunch of CSM's. The CSM model got corrupted the minute the Goons/PL/Brick squad got their hands on it. The EVE player communities wishes and concerns are subservient to the wishes of the current CSM make up. That's just the reality of it.
if you dont like whos in the CSM, get your own candidate, the very fact that something like 90% of people in EvE live in high-sec but really the only people who bothered to vote were null-sec, and then VAST MAJORITY of those people voted for 1 guy, that should say SOMETHING.
and that something is that OBVIOUSLY majority of high-sec players are too apathetic to vote for anyone and only the people in null who have anything actually at stake in the game care enough to organize into true political parties.
its a free EvE, you wanna do something, do it, just don't get mad that your competition has more people willing to field at the voting ballots then you do. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
643
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 22:13:00 -
[47] - Quote
Dunbar Hulan wrote:Lets be honest, we should just bin the current bunch of CSM's. The CSM model got corrupted the minute the Goons/PL/Brick squad got their hands on it. The EVE player communities wishes and concerns are subservient to the wishes of the current CSM make up. That's just the reality of it.
Let's be honest, you're basing your entire position on things you've heard about those alliances doing, and not at all on what the CSM delegates have actually done. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Skunk Gracklaw
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
155
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 22:44:00 -
[48] - Quote
Zey Nadar wrote:Thorn Galen wrote: Regardless of feelings about Goons, The Mittani is producing results.
Ive yet to see any results explicitly attributed to him Only because you don't want to hear about them. This CSM has gotten more done than the other CSMs combined.
|
Nerdy Deadshot
In The Goo EVE Trade Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 23:48:00 -
[49] - Quote
Lets be honest here... Ron Paul for CSM |
The Apostle
The Black Priests
489
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 00:56:00 -
[50] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:The Apostle wrote:imho, the only CSM model that can represent the entire Eve playerbase has to be based on representative boundaries.
The only model that can give special treatment, more like. Let me make a wild guess here... these "representative boundaries" would just happen to give a slew of candidates who would by pure concidence, be more likely to endorse your views? In short, you want CCP to ignore the majority in favour of the minority, since you can't get enough people to vote the way you want them to. And THAT doesn't happen now? Current and proposed changes to Eve are slewed which way?
But no. Regions should include lowsec, null wherever. In fact let's say you divided Eve by 8 marks of a compass and put up 8 candidate posititons for those regions. ALL sec status is included. The same political process applies for your candidate as it stands now.
Your right to vote in Area A, B or C is easily implemented by snapshotting populations. You can have as many alts in as many places as you want but you need to know when a snapshot occurs for them to be corruptible. It reduces if not eliminates the likelihood of alliance stacked voting immediately.
Quote:The current model perfectly represents the entire playerbase. If the whole of "hi-se"c between them can't even get a candidate the 9th most votes, and of the people who did vote, over 70% of them voted for a candidate who got elected, then you might want to consider that either. -Not so many people in hi-sec are in agreement with your ideas as you assume, regardless of where they conduct their play
The highsec apathy is an issue and that's what I was pointing out. It does not make the current method of voting any more 'correct" because of it.
And, if I had a fixed view of highsec and what it should be, what others said wouldn't matter now would it? What I do is promote and seek debate/discussion to harness/modify my own views. I have just as quickly changed a view based on good rational argument.
Quote: You can't claim that hi-sec voters aren't represented because so many of them voted but didn't get to see their guy win; 70% of all votes were winning votes. If, on the other hand, there truly is a huge groundswell of support for your point of view in hi-sec amongst people who can't be bothered to spend 30 seconds to click a button, then it seems much more ~democratic~ for you to try and persuade them to spend that 30 seconds than to cry to CCP for special treatment.
Yes indeed. And I'm posting here for what reason? Wasn't one of my comments complaining about highsec is too lazy and disorganised to find and field a candidate?
But I totally agree. And of course, the ones that didn't vote are usually the loudest against the elected. But you know, there's another reason for that. None of the candidates might have been deemed suitable... Even in Australia, with compulsory voting, we can still vote informally by voting for no-one.
Quote:Since you care so much about democracy and all, I mean. And I do. Having alliance candidates voted in by predominately alliance members is NOT a democracy. The largest alliances will always get their candidate in.
It's part of the reason why highseccers etc. void the CSM and don't/refuse to vote. THEY will not be represented.
In my plan (open to debate as always), they ARE represented, whether they like it or not.
EDIT: As an adjunct here, 8 regions by compass point will almost guarantee the rep will need to take into account both 0.0, lowsec and highsec into account in his deliberations. Pissing off whole regions is NOT going to be productive is it?
(And the snapshot mentioned should also ensure WH residents are picked up by eg: static WH at time of snapshot.) Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo!
|
|
Skunk Gracklaw
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
163
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 07:27:00 -
[51] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:And I do. Having alliance candidates voted in by predominately alliance members is NOT a democracy. The largest alliances will always get their candidate in. A bunch of people voted and their candidates won. A bunch of people didn't vote and now want CCP to put some kind of lame mechanic in place to negate the people who *did* vote. You have an interesting definition of democracy.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
643
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 08:56:00 -
[52] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:And I do. Having alliance candidates voted in by predominately alliance members is NOT a democracy. The largest alliances will always get their candidate in.
So your main problem with giving the candidates with the most votes seats on the CSM is that the people who can be bothered to vote aren't voting for the people you think should be elected.
See that's the problem with all this "democacy" stuff - sometimes people just won't do what you tell them to, even though you know what's best for them. How annoying!
So of course the obvious solution is, instead of letting them choose to vote for whomever they want (because they're stubbornly voting for the wrong people), to only present them with a set of choices that you approve of. Only that way can we replicate the excellent success that RL political systems like those in the US and UK have demonstrated in representing the proles.
OK, back in non-bizzarro world:
If "hi-sec" is under-represented because the hi-sec community disorganised and apathetic, the solution is not to hobble the organised, active community. You're explicitly trying to disenfranchise nullsec alliance members because they're organised and interested. "These guys I don't like are more effective than the guys I like! Quick, punish them!". Hardly the stuff of Saturday morning specials there, skipper. If you lost the race, then you lose some weight and get some training in, and try harder next time. You don't petition the judges to give you a head start or give you a special prize for entering the race. Well, maybe you do, but people with any self-respect don't.
Your "regional representation" idea is self evidently ridiculous, comically easy to manipulate (snapshots, LOL!) and takes no account of the fact that regional position is almost meaningless: There are no Kor-Azor specific issues. There's no Lonetrek ethnic problem.
The CSM isn't here to resolve the balance of payments between Minmatar and Caldari space. It's here to represent the players, not the star systems, and the delegates are chosen on an equal basis by all the players who can vote for anyone they want to, not on the basis of them being able to choose anyone from a list you approve of. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
March rabbit
Ganse Shadow of xXDEATHXx
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 09:53:00 -
[53] - Quote
Fortune Taker wrote:wait a minute! When the hell was the vote? I never got a ballot.
i think the problem is there is no quick link on the eve front page that takes you to the voting
also where the hell is the link to get to the main site from evegate? have you ever seen Eve client? i remember when voting was ongoing Eve client showed every time you log in special message with link to voting page |
pussnheels
Vintage heavy industries
118
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 10:17:00 -
[54] - Quote
Steelshine wrote:pussnheels wrote:Feligast wrote:pussnheels wrote:main problem what i have with the elections is the fact that less than 18% of the playerbase actually voted , Because of these low voters turn out it can be rigged easily , hence the 2 goons in the current CSM
While I applaud what you're trying to do, explain to me how 82% of the playerbase not voting = "rigged" what i mean by rigged is the following Even tho i despise you Goons , i do admire the way you guys pull together i don't think there is any other alliance that can rely on a loyal core of members like the goons So with 7000 members when even 1/2 of them vote with all their second or third account you already have a large percentage of the voters turnpout So i am not saying your CSM delegates cheated not at all , But it is relative easy with such turnout to manipulate the results An organized, substantial portion of the eve playerbase won seats on the CSM! lets go cry about it. Don't worry, I too think elections should be won by who I like, not who gets the most votes. there you are wrong , who is crying not me i am just stating the fact that at the moment i can be manipulated in favour of one group like what happenend now , and yes i do think the mittani is a absolute egocentric baffoon
but if he ever comes up with a great idea or concept to improve this game for all i will support him, unlikely to happen th I do not agree with what you are saying , but i will defend to the death your right to say it...... Voltaire |
Rellik B00n
Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 10:35:00 -
[55] - Quote
mkint wrote: pants-on-head-ruhtarded voters put their votes into whoever will buy them candy, you get pants-on-head CSM members.
excellent synopsis
|
March rabbit
Ganse Shadow of xXDEATHXx
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 10:45:00 -
[56] - Quote
The Apostle wrote: But no. Regions should include lowsec, null wherever. In fact let's say you divided Eve by 8 marks of a compass and put up 8 candidate posititons for those regions. ALL sec status is included. The same political process applies for your candidate as it stands now.
Your right to vote in Area A, B or C is easily implemented by snapshotting populations. You can have as many alts in as many places as you want but you need to know when a snapshot occurs for them to be corruptible. It reduces if not eliminates the likelihood of alliance stacked voting immediately.
nice idea you know!!!!
1 month ago i made a trip around the universe. Just for fun. Wanted to visit many spaces i have never been to before.
Let's say you got this snapshot in that time. Where could i appear then? And why the hell you force me to visit that space some time after to execute my right to vote?
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |