Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 67 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Avon
191
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 13:29:00 -
[1111] - Quote
Let's just agree that the situation *could* arise with a probability of 1/(total number of actual players) and be done with it.
It *could* happen, it is just bloody unlikely.
Importantly, it isn't the case right now and any assertion to the contrary would need to be backed up. The very minimum would be a bar graph but extra merit will be awarded for a pie chart made from actual pie and sent to my home address. |
Salvos Rhoska
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
419
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 13:32:00 -
[1112] - Quote
Even that claim to a tiny margin of "can/could" has no evidence to support that it actually ever "can/could".
Its an empty claim, with no method of proof. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20218
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 13:32:00 -
[1113] - Quote
Avon wrote:Let's just agree that the situation *could* arise with a probability of 1/(total number of actual players) and be done with it.
It *could* happen, it is just bloody unlikely.
Importantly, it isn't the case right now and any assertion to the contrary would need to be backed up. The very minimum would be a bar graph but extra merit will be awarded for a pie chart made from actual pie and sent to my home address. Yup. I especially approve of the pie delivery condition. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
865
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 13:33:00 -
[1114] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Avon wrote:Actually you should be using the modal verb "could" rather than "can" as you are expressing a possibility rather than an ability. That's a fair point. Although I'd probably argue that it's both GÇö after all, they do have the ability in much the same way as it is a possibility. Of course, actually living up to that ability would require a lot more work than they're likely to want to put into the whole affair. Convincing people that their voices are actually carried on to the meeting room seems like the biggest obstacle given Salvos' reticenceGǪ
he can read the summit and meeting notes to determine if the CSM actually didn't represent his interests (though he may need to wait given CCPs historical tardiness on releasing those), and given that he's got such a bee in his bonnet over the reproc amount, he can infact look up existing CSM members and see whether one or more will represent his interests in the *next* discussion of this feature with CCP.
ie he has not even proven yet that his interests haven't been represented to CCP, or can't be represented to CCP. if his individual pet hate was taken up with CCP in that manner, he'd probably have proven that the existing CSM was quite capable of disproportionately representing his interests if he actually lobbied them to do it.
Though given how far he seems to misunderstand the business of running orders for melt, (ie when I pointed that I've actually run that business, and his margins were way off, and that the other new businesses (refining, compression, dovetail nicely with melt collecting) I don't really remember him doing anything other than stamp foot about the devaluation of a skill.
|
Salvos Rhoska
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
419
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 13:33:00 -
[1115] - Quote
Tippia wrote:The conditions kind of do that in and of themselves, you knowGǪ
You have not proven that those conditions can/could ever come to pass. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20218
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 13:36:00 -
[1116] - Quote
Tauranon wrote:Though given how far he seems to misunderstand the business of running orders for melt, (ie when I pointed that I've actually run that business, and his margins were way off, and that the other new businesses (refining, compression, dovetail nicely with melt collecting) I don't really remember him doing anything other than stamp foot about the devaluation of a skill. Speaking of whichGǪ I've seen it mentioned a few times here and there but can't find it in any dev comment or in the blog, but has there been anything to suggest that the ore compression skill will be removed?
Salvos Rhoska wrote:You have not proven that those conditions can/could ever come to pass. Learn to read. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Salvos Rhoska
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
421
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 13:41:00 -
[1117] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Learn to read. Its fairly apparent I am literate, or else I would not be able to post here, not to mention I would infact be incapable of reading you telling me to "learn to read", which makes it doubly stupid even if you actually believe that.
Ad hominem aside, no. You have not proven that that set of circumstances can/could ever come to pass. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20218
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 13:46:00 -
[1118] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Its fairly apparent I am literate When considering how often you skip over whole sections, completely misconstrue other people's points and arguments, and make incorrect claims about what has and hasn't been said, I'm not so sure it's as apparent as you'd like it to beGǪ
Quote:You have not proven that that set of circumstances can/could ever come to pass. Learn to read.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Avon
193
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 13:47:00 -
[1119] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Even that claim to a tiny margin of "can/could" has no evidence to support that it actually ever "can/could". Its an empty claim, with no method of proof.
It is just statistics mate:
1/(Total number of individual players) is the probability of the CSM fully representing the entire playerbase. It doesn't require proof of method, it is self contained.
I would agree that the inherent unlikelihood makes the modal verb "could" more appropriate than "can" and that the use of the second variant puts a misleading amount of weight on the possibility.
Has it happened? Very unlikely Could it happen? Very unlikely Can it happen? Well, yes there a defined probability = very unlikely.
By using a modal verb which implies a positive outcome to an unlikely event the argument was cleverly skewed, but regardless the probability remains the same (i.e. bugger all) |
Sable Moran
Moran Light Industries
356
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 13:52:00 -
[1120] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:This is a huge hit to high sec income.
Wrong. This is not a general nerf to high sec, this is a specific nerf to those missions runners who bother to loot.
There's a world of difference there. Sable's Ammo Shop at Alentene V - Moon 4 - Duvolle Labs Factory. Hybrid charges, Projectile ammo, Missiles, Drones, Ships, Need'em? We have'em, at affordable prices. Pop in at our Ammo Shop in sunny Alentene. |
|
Salvos Rhoska
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
421
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 13:55:00 -
[1121] - Quote
@Tippia:
Its a simple question.
Its ironic when you reply "learn to read" to it, when it is infact you who are not capable apparently of reading the question put to you.
You can/could not prove that that set of circumstaces can/could ever come to pass.
Checkmate again. I almost feel bad about all this. Its is like chastising a delinquent school kid, instead of teaching them to learn from their mistakes.
I'm sorry Tippia, but you just aren't smart enough for these kinds of games. Out of your league. Go back to stonewalling those those even less intellectually fortunate than yourself, whom your puerile tactics might still manage to sucker punch once in awhile for the gratification you need. |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
409
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 13:56:00 -
[1122] - Quote
CSM is a useless popularity contest and pretty much entirely irrelevant to this thread topic. Frankly it should be abolished. It amounts to nothing more than a lobbyist panel which is not healthy for games overall.
Has CSM done good things, in some places yes, in other places no. Has CSM been REQUIRED. Not at all.
Lets get back to making fun of 0.0 guys dependency on Moongoo and their false assumptions on risk/reward!
|
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
865
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 13:56:00 -
[1123] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Tauranon wrote:Though given how far he seems to misunderstand the business of running orders for melt, (ie when I pointed that I've actually run that business, and his margins were way off, and that the other new businesses (refining, compression, dovetail nicely with melt collecting) I don't really remember him doing anything other than stamp foot about the devaluation of a skill. Speaking of whichGǪ I've seen it mentioned a few times here and there but can't find it in any dev comment or in the blog, but has there been anything to suggest that the Ore Compression skill will be removed?
Not sure if I know that skill. The existing BPOs don't have it as a prereq, the rorq doesn't have it as a prereq, and the industrial core doesn't have it as a prereq. My alt is 1 day or so out of a rorq, has all the processing skills bar the industrial core one and doesn't seem to have it. It may have been victim to the cleanup of skills.
|
Sanara Estidal
Pro Synergy
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 13:57:00 -
[1124] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Even that claim to a tiny margin of "can/could" has no evidence to support that it actually ever "can/could". Its an empty claim, with no method of proof. I am a high sec player (and a salvager at that).
I did not vote for the CSM.
I feel that the CSM have represented my needs from reading the CSM minutes and seeing the changes that have occurred.
Therefore, without me voting the CSM have represented me and as such this is proof that they can represent me. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20221
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:00:00 -
[1125] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Its a simple question. GǪthat has been answered in full. It has even been expanded on and explained further by people on Gǣyour sideGǥ.
You refuse to read these answers and keep lying about how no such answer exists, keep employing fallacies to hide the fact that you are wrong, and just generally keep the topic from moving forward. To this, I can now only respond GÇ£learn to readGÇ¥. I tried GÇ£don't use fallaciesGÇ¥ but it was proven hopelessly na+»ve of meGǪ
Tauranon wrote:Not sure if I know that skill. The existing BPOs don't have it as a prereq, the rorq doesn't have it as a prereq, and the industrial core doesn't have it as a prereq. My alt is 1 day or so out of a rorq, has all the processing skills bar the industrial core one and doesn't seem to have it. It may have been victim to the cleanup of skills. Good point. I should probably check on the GÇ£publishedGÇ¥ flag before tearing through the skill DB. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Salvos Rhoska
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
421
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:01:00 -
[1126] - Quote
Avon wrote:It is just statistics mate:
Even in statistics, there exists such a quantity (or lack thereof) as 0 (zero).
Somethings can never happen, no matter what contrived circumstances you set as a premise for them to do so. Nor does that eliminate the onus to prove that that set of circumstances can ever actually come to pass, no matter with how small a margin of likelihood. |
Avon
196
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:03:00 -
[1127] - Quote
If the CSM works anything like Tippia and myself then it doesn't really matter exactly how many people they represent.
We had opposing points of view.
We thrashed it out.
We established a common ground around the subject of pie.
That, dear readers, is what politics is all about. |
Avon
196
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:07:00 -
[1128] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Avon wrote:It is just statistics mate: Even in statistics, there exists such a quantity (or lack thereof) as 0 (zero). Somethings can never happen, no matter what contrived circumstances you set as a premise for them to do so. Nor does that eliminate the onus to prove that that set of circumstances can ever actually come to pass, no matter with how small a margin of likelihood.
You are mathematically contradicting your own argument.
If you claim that the CSM can't represent everyone then you establish that at least 1 person must not be represented. You have defined that it is a non-zero sum, therefore the probability is as I stated. |
Sarah McKnobbo
McKnobbo Universal Traders
114
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:13:00 -
[1129] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote: It is important to remember the very small % of the player base that has actually voted for them. Representation is proportional to how many votes they get, and since the overwhelming majority of players have not voted for them, they cannot be said to represent the interests of those who have not voted for them (ie: the overwhelming majority of the EVE player base).
Granted, but people should take the chance to cast thier vote. If someone can't take the small amount of time to do this then they really shouldn't complain, nor should this be used against the CSM. The amount of forum rage around changes that are made suggests to me that there are lots of people who do just this, taking into account the 14% turnout Malcanis stated. |
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
1773
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:15:00 -
[1130] - Quote
wow this thread really did make it to 55 pages... just wow. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... Winter Expansion new ship request |
|
Salvos Rhoska
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
422
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:18:00 -
[1131] - Quote
Avon wrote:You are mathematically contradicting your own argument.
If you claim that the CSM can't represent everyone then you establish that at least 1 person must not be represented. You have defined that it is a non-zero sum, therefore the probability is as I stated.
She cannot prove the probability that the conditions she stipulated can/could occur. With no proof that it can/could occur, the probability remains at zero.
As to the 1 person not being represented, that is sufficient, in current context, to evidence that the CSM does not represent the entirety of the EVE population. And there is no proof that there will not always be that 1 person sufficient to disprove those conditions in future. |
Avon
197
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:21:00 -
[1132] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Avon wrote:You are mathematically contradicting your own argument.
If you claim that the CSM can't represent everyone then you establish that at least 1 person must not be represented. You have defined that it is a non-zero sum, therefore the probability is as I stated. She cannot prove the probability that the conditions she stipulated can/could occur. With no proof that it can/could occur, the probability remains at zero. As to the 1 person not being represented, that is sufficient, in current context, to evidence that the CSM does not represent the entirety of the EVE population. And there is no proof that there will not always be that 1 person sufficient to disprove those conditions in future.
I'm not absolutely sure that you understand what mathematical probability means. |
Salvos Rhoska
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
422
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:21:00 -
[1133] - Quote
I'm not complaining. Just stating the obvious and true, which is that a CSM body elected by only 14% of the population, does not represent the interests of the entire population. No vote. No mandate or empowerment of representation.
In order for them to do so, it would require a full 100% of the EVE population to participate and vote for a CSM candidate.
The system is what it is. Thats fine and beyond my purview to change. It is not, however, representative of the interests of the entire population of EVE. |
Sanara Estidal
Pro Synergy
1
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:22:00 -
[1134] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Avon wrote:You are mathematically contradicting your own argument.
If you claim that the CSM can't represent everyone then you establish that at least 1 person must not be represented. You have defined that it is a non-zero sum, therefore the probability is as I stated. She cannot prove the probability that the conditions she stipulated can/could occur. With no proof that it can/could occur, the probability remains at zero. As to the 1 person not being represented, that is sufficient, in current context, to evidence that the CSM does not represent the entirety of the EVE population. And there is no proof that there will not always be that 1 person sufficient to disprove those conditions in future. Everyone could quit leaving only 1 player who is represented by the CSM though, which would mean the whole playerbase is represented. It's not likely to happen, but it is a possibility so it can. I think that's why everyone's arguing. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20222
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:22:00 -
[1135] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:As to the 1 person not being represented, that is sufficient, in current context, to evidence that the CSM does not represent the entirety of the EVE population. GǪin that one instance. But the fact that you have now assigned an GÇ£agree/don't agreeGÇ¥ variable to people, we can trivially establish that there is a non-zero probability that everyone ticks the GÇ£agreeGÇ¥ box at once and that their opinion is therefore represented. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
865
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:23:00 -
[1136] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Tippia wrote:The conditions kind of do that in and of themselves, you knowGǪ You have not proven that those conditions can/could ever come to pass. @Tauranon: You are misrepresenting or misunderstanding my positions. I can understand why you think those are my positions, but they are not. I state that matter of factly, and it is ofc up to you to determine whether my saying so sways your perspective on me or not, but why would I lie when I say so. Furthermore, I'd appreciate it if you spoke to me directly rather than in the 3rd person, so that I can address your misunderstanding/misrepresentation of my position personally. Afterall, who better to elaborate and explain the actuality of what my position is, than myself. And again, I have no motive to lie or dissemble. Your perception of me is a misunderstanding, I hope you will accept that when I say it sincerely.
it was a post directed to Tippia. For good reason as I see you've ignored the substance of it anyway.
The substance remains, that you have not verified whether or not the CSM has represented your interests to CCP, nor have you verified whether or not if you ask them, will they or will they not represent your interests to CCP. Step 1 has plainly been done by CCP and CSM (publishing their plan well in advance so you can see to see how it lies with respect to your interest), step 2 is in your court, because plainly since despite having done the scrap metal position, and living in a prime gunmining location, I am not going to do that legwork for you (because I'm not at all convinced its a bad idea).
I'm sure that CSMs will find the scrap 55% number interesting, and I'm sure that CCP would be willing to explain it.
|
Salvos Rhoska
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
422
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:23:00 -
[1137] - Quote
Avon wrote:I'm not absolutely sure that you understand what mathematical probability means.
Calculate and prove to me then the realistic probability of the CSM panel representing the entirety of the EVE population. |
Avon
197
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:25:00 -
[1138] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Avon wrote:I'm not absolutely sure that you understand what mathematical probability means. Calculate and prove to me then the realistic probability of the CSM panel representing the entirety of the EVE population.
1 / (total number of individual players) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20222
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:27:00 -
[1139] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Calculate and prove to me then the realistic probability of the CSM panel representing the entirety of the EVE population. You're moving the goalposts.
The probability that all 450,000(ish) TQ accounts randomly agree on a matter is 1:2^450,000(ish) (or, more accurately, the probability that they hold any one or more opinion(s) on the matter, to the power of 450,000). This is a non-zero value. If they all agree, the opinion they all hold on the matter is represented on the CSM. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Salvos Rhoska
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
422
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 14:29:00 -
[1140] - Quote
Avon wrote:1 / (total number of individual players) I see.
So in your opinion the likelihood of Obama representing 100% of the US population is 1/317,493,212?
Now calculate the likelihood of 100% of the US population actually voting for Obama, or voting at all. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 67 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |