Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
|
CCP Logibro
C C P C C P Alliance
1440
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 11:59:58 -
[1] - Quote
The votes are in, and CSM 11 has taken office. Take a look at the breakdown of voting in this dev blog.
CCP Logibro // EVE Universe Community Team // Distributor of Nanites // Patron Saint of Logistics
@CCP_Logibro
|
|
Katrina Bekers
Rim Collection RC The Old Guard.
251
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 15:46:20 -
[2] - Quote
Third worst election in terms of participation.
Is this something to worry about?
<< THE RABBLE BRIGADE >>
|
|
CCP Guard
C C P C C P Alliance
5307
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 15:50:55 -
[3] - Quote
Katrina Bekers wrote:Third worst election in terms of participation.
Is this something to worry about?
It's not a primary concern in itself but it is a clear indicator that we can (and in my mind need to) raise more interest for the CSM.
There's still a lot of interest in the CSM project and there was an abundance of good candidates to pick from so in that regard we have a strong base to build on as I see it.
CCP Guard | EVE Community Developer |-á@CCP_Guard
|
|
Ix Method
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
490
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 16:03:17 -
[4] - Quote
Congratulations Xenuria, hope it was worth the wait
Travelling at the speed of love.
|
Xenuria
1087
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 16:05:20 -
[5] - Quote
Ix Method wrote:Congratulations Xenuria, hope it was worth the wait
Indeed.
CSM 11 Candidate
|
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate Naquatech Syndicate
1907
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 16:14:23 -
[6] - Quote
Where is any of mine representatives
Akrasjel Lanate
Founder and CEO of Naquatech Conglomerate
Executor of Naquatech Syndicate
Citizen of Solitude
|
EvilweaselFinance
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
831
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 16:40:13 -
[7] - Quote
When did it change from top 2 to top 4 were perma-seats? I thought only two were announced at fanfest. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5991
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 17:09:54 -
[8] - Quote
EvilweaselFinance wrote:When did it change from top 2 to top 4 were perma-seats? I thought only two were announced at fanfest.
It was talked about last year, and made it into the revised white paper. Just lost with the switchover.
Woo! CSM XI!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Dierdra Vaal
Interstellar Stargate Syndicate
349
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 17:17:43 -
[9] - Quote
The very low turnout is rather disappointing, and I believe it is the cause of the overwhelming number of 0.0 bloc candidates on the council (3 goons, 4 pl, and all but one I can identify as 0.0 pilots) which makes me worry for the representation of other gameplay areas by the CSM.
I would like to know what CCP plans to do the coming year (not just during the election) to raise the profile of the CSM with the non-bloc playerbase, as the messaging this election was woefully lacking.
Veto #205
Director Emeritus at EVE University
CSM1 delegate, CSM3 chairman and CSM5 vice-chairman
Evesterdam organiser and CSM Vote Match founder
Co-Author of the Galactic Party Planning Guide
|
Kismeteer
The Scope Gallente Federation
879
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 17:50:01 -
[10] - Quote
Now taking bets on how long Xenuria stays on, 10 : 1 pay off for closest guesser.
Send me your isk to Kismeteer with a date, and if you want a time, closest to actual answer wins. |
|
Rhivre
TarNec Invisible Exchequer
888
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 18:13:33 -
[11] - Quote
Dierdra Vaal wrote:The very low turnout is rather disappointing, and I believe it is the cause of the overwhelming number of 0.0 bloc candidates on the council (3 goons, 4 pl, and all but one I can identify as 0.0 pilots) which makes me worry for the representation of other gameplay areas by the CSM.
I would like to know what CCP plans to do the coming year (not just during the election) to raise the profile of the CSM with the non-bloc playerbase, as the messaging this election was woefully lacking.
I think the awareness among players is definitely an issue. Voter engagement is something that needs to be worked on
Fluffy Bunny Pic!
|
|
CCP Guard
C C P C C P Alliance
5307
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 18:57:03 -
[12] - Quote
EvilweaselFinance wrote:When did it change from top 2 to top 4 were perma-seats? I thought only two were announced at fanfest.
The White Paper states four. Announcing two at Fanfest was our mistake :)
CCP Guard | EVE Community Developer |-á@CCP_Guard
|
|
|
CCP Guard
C C P C C P Alliance
5307
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 19:02:30 -
[13] - Quote
Dierdra Vaal wrote:The very low turnout is rather disappointing, and I believe it is the cause of the overwhelming number of 0.0 bloc candidates on the council (3 goons, 4 pl, and all but one I can identify as 0.0 pilots) which makes me worry for the representation of other gameplay areas by the CSM.
I would like to know what CCP plans to do the coming year (not just during the election) to raise the profile of the CSM with the non-bloc playerbase, as the messaging this election was woefully lacking.
There was definitely less push from our end and it was partly because the ownership transfer of the project caused delays and dropped balls that couldn't be recovered in time. Things like launcher graphics and Social media banners weren't produced and with Fanfest drawing closer there wasn't any room to scramble.
That is something we'll have ready in time for the next election.
Raising awareness of the CSM's work is then something we'll work on throughout the term with the CSM.
CCP Guard | EVE Community Developer |-á@CCP_Guard
|
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2821
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 19:03:41 -
[14] - Quote
CCP Guard wrote:Katrina Bekers wrote:Third worst election in terms of participation.
Is this something to worry about? It's not a primary concern in itself but it is a clear indicator that we can (and in my mind need to) raise more interest for the CSM. There's still a lot of interest in the CSM project and there was an abundance of good candidates to pick from so in that regard we have a strong base to build on as I see it.
What if people didn't vote because they think it's the best way to show you they don't think the CSM represent them anyway? |
|
CCP Guard
C C P C C P Alliance
5307
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 19:26:05 -
[15] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:CCP Guard wrote:Katrina Bekers wrote:Third worst election in terms of participation.
Is this something to worry about? It's not a primary concern in itself but it is a clear indicator that we can (and in my mind need to) raise more interest for the CSM. There's still a lot of interest in the CSM project and there was an abundance of good candidates to pick from so in that regard we have a strong base to build on as I see it. What if people didn't vote because they think it's the best way to show you they don't think the CSM represent them anyway?
That's a perfectly valid stance. Hopefully we can change those people's minds over the course of this term.
CCP Guard | EVE Community Developer |-á@CCP_Guard
|
|
Digger Pollard
A.P.E.X Southern Sitizens
10
|
Posted - 2016.05.14 00:18:03 -
[16] - Quote
CCP Guard wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:CCP Guard wrote:Katrina Bekers wrote:Third worst election in terms of participation.
Is this something to worry about? It's not a primary concern in itself but it is a clear indicator that we can (and in my mind need to) raise more interest for the CSM. There's still a lot of interest in the CSM project and there was an abundance of good candidates to pick from so in that regard we have a strong base to build on as I see it. What if people didn't vote because they think it's the best way to show you they don't think the CSM represent them anyway? That's a perfectly valid stance. Hopefully we can change those people's minds over the course of this term.
So, not even the amount of people online at any given day could be arsed to vote. I think the boycott message is pretty clear here. When can we expect the announcement of abolishment of CFCSM? |
Joia Crenca
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
287
|
Posted - 2016.05.14 00:20:36 -
[17] - Quote
"What if people didn't vote because they think it's the best way to show you they don't think the CSM represent them anyway?" That might be part of it, but also it seems like the CSM is ineffective. If CCP (or a head decision maker at CCP) wants something that the players are strongly objecting to across the board.... the CSM doesn't seem to be active at that time. The CSM often doesn't seem to be a good voice when a good voice would really count.
But my view is that the CSM would be dismissed outright if they did take the players' side during a mass objection to a change. No reasons given, just a shut door.
|
Joia Crenca
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
287
|
Posted - 2016.05.14 00:21:53 -
[18] - Quote
Digger Pollard wrote:CCP Guard wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:CCP Guard wrote:Katrina Bekers wrote:Third worst election in terms of participation.
Is this something to worry about? It's not a primary concern in itself but it is a clear indicator that we can (and in my mind need to) raise more interest for the CSM. There's still a lot of interest in the CSM project and there was an abundance of good candidates to pick from so in that regard we have a strong base to build on as I see it. What if people didn't vote because they think it's the best way to show you they don't think the CSM represent them anyway? That's a perfectly valid stance. Hopefully we can change those people's minds over the course of this term. So, not even the amount of people online at any given day could be arsed to vote. I think the boycott message is pretty clear here. When can we expect the announcement of abolishment of CFCSM?
Or perhaps a change in the level of effectiveness allowed to the CSM. |
Digger Pollard
A.P.E.X Southern Sitizens
10
|
Posted - 2016.05.14 00:25:29 -
[19] - Quote
Joia Crenca wrote:Or perhaps a change in the level of effectiveness allowed to the CSM.
I disagree. CFCSM is corrupt at the core, more power (whatever you name it) is just more corruption. Abolishment is the answer.
|
Huang Mo
Tianxia Inc
110
|
Posted - 2016.05.14 06:18:20 -
[20] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote: What if people didn't vote because they think it's the best way to show you they don't think the CSM represent them anyway?
I voted but am discouraged from doing it in the future as _none_ of my candidates made it. Block voting is killing the election but I don't have any idea what to do about it :-( |
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5991
|
Posted - 2016.05.14 16:31:47 -
[21] - Quote
Huang Mo wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote: What if people didn't vote because they think it's the best way to show you they don't think the CSM represent them anyway?
I voted but am discouraged from doing it in the future as _none_ of my candidates made it. Block voting is killing the election but I don't have any idea what to do about it :-(
Rally other people to vote for the people you want on?
The blocks don't have any secret. Just numbers. And if you don't vote, then you're just ceding the election to them
Woo! CSM XI!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Dreamer Targaryen
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2016.05.14 16:33:05 -
[22] - Quote
I have a few questions:
In the devblog you write:
Quote:In total, we had 22, 345 votes cast in the election for CSM 11.
Regarding accounts created by year, you list the following numbers (2003 - 2016)
Quote: 224 309 441 893 1082 1268 1679 1739 1836 2484 3506 3283 3162 459 Which equals to 22365 votes.
Regarding the day people voted on (1-26) you list these numbers:
Quote:2955 3848 2377 1307 783 952 700 524 641 473 407 331 283 790 283 284 146 447 290 241 292 309 733 1008 1420 542 Which equals to 22366 votes.
Now if I manually go through the votes.blt-file I get 22366 votes. Even if I get rid of the votes that only voted for Apothne and no-one else (23), I still can't see how you get to the number of 22345 votes cast.
Secondly: If someone drops out of the csm, how do you determine who he gets replaces with?
Do you modify the votes.blt-filt to the following:
53 14 -1 -[dropout] (which might lead to someone else getting kicked out, too due to the svt-system) Or do you just exclude every member and let it run for 1 seat:
53 1 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -13 -17 -19 -21 -29 -31 -38 -41 -46 -51 Or do you determine the replacement in a different way (if so: how)? |
Callista Jael
Black Science Navigators
1
|
Posted - 2016.05.14 19:54:12 -
[23] - Quote
Dierdra Vaal wrote:The very low turnout is rather disappointing, and I believe it is the cause of the overwhelming number of 0.0 bloc candidates on the council (3 goons, 4 pl, and all but one I can identify as 0.0 pilots) which makes me worry for the representation of other gameplay areas by the CSM.
I would like to know what CCP plans to do the coming year (not just during the election) to raise the profile of the CSM with the non-bloc playerbase, as the messaging this election was woefully lacking.
Also @ CCP Guard
You've been around for a while so maybe you can address what I'm fixing to say. I don't mean this to come across as an attack, but to throw out a few concerns that may or may not have been considered.
How many people are so emotionally invested in this game that they're explicitly concerned about its inner development? For instance, I'm happy with the game. I like to see it improve. I like to read peoples input on what should be a focus for expansion. But at the end of the day I occasionally just want to spend an hour or so and relax with a little entertainment, and I would argue that the majority of people feel the same, as opposed to having the resources to absorb ourselves in a gaming universe - whether that happens inside or outside of its reality. Many of us just don't have that luxury, and even if we did there's truth in too much of a good thing, and we burn ourselves out in the process. In a list of priorities there are so many things infinitely more important.
Granted, I fully understand the benefits associated with a player elected council. I think it's an awesome idea - IF - the whole campaign process weren't so ridiculous. When I participated in voting on the 2nd council (my first and last voting experience) I remember that not one candidate could introduce himself without an accompanying life story. It was all irrelevant and so very tiring, and I didn't have the time to sift through all of that just to discover that our common interests never went beyond Black Ops battleships and modular stations. I don't care if he was engaged and married to a fellow EVE player. I don't care if he fought in a space battle on the opposite side of the universe. And I don't care if he experienced the Jita rebellion.
As far as I'm concerned, low voter turnout is a direct result of an uncaring attitude about the game and its players. We can throw all of our university knowledge and experience to the problem all day long and analyze it until we're crippled, but you'll never get the results you're looking for until the game starts to dramatically affect players lives. |
Huang Mo
Tianxia Inc
111
|
Posted - 2016.05.15 02:11:39 -
[24] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:The blocks don't have any secret. Just numbers
They have overwhelming numbers, that's the point. The candidates that didn't made it did their very best to rally people behind them but to no avail |
Rimstalker
Asteroid Central Guns-N-Roses
5
|
Posted - 2016.05.15 04:32:03 -
[25] - Quote
Most people do not vote if they think they do not actually have a say. The most surefire way to cement that idea is to not listen to anything that the people say. We see it all of the time around here...
So CSM is going to do what? What exactly are they going to actually do? Take our concerns to a group of people at CCP who have provided more than ample examples of not giving a damn?:)
Maybe they will "fight for our right to party"? Or pass on incredible insights and awareness along to CCP who has established that they can and will do whatever they want and the player be damned?
Maybe they will represent us so that we have a voice at CCP? Maybe they will do a whole lot of nothing again? I cannot really name 3 things the CSM has ever really done.
Here is a question for the CSM's and CCP and let us see what they are doing or have done:
Name three things that the CSM took from the players and got CCP to do that has improved the game.
That is really their jobs there at the CSM correct? Or are we still clinging to the notion that they get things fixed? Like Fleet Mechanics...how is that coming along? Maybe they are coming up with another awesome mini-game like research the crap cell garbage that is so boring, uneventful that the best part of it was when I realized I didn't have to do and could remove it from my neocom like I do with so much other garbage they have wedged into it.
Maybe they are getting rules standardized so that everyone uses the same set of rules? How amazing would that be? Maybe we could get them to do something about punishments standardized so if someone breaks the rules they get the same punishment applied to them vs. having a friend or two pull some strings and some people get no punishment for violations of rules that get other people banned. Now, that would be progress.
This next CSM election cycle? Vote for me...apparently I am one of the few who does tell the truth. |
Erika Mizune
The Soul Society DeepSpace.
2346
|
Posted - 2016.05.15 05:00:42 -
[26] - Quote
That "What If" Apoth hadn't dropped results *sniffles*
Nice to see the full results however, was fun to look through them all and getting to see how I did too!
Congrats to the new council :)
#Erika4CSM12
DJ Yumene of Eve Radio | Blog | Sounds of New Eden | Eve Radio | My BPO Quest | Erika For CSM XI
|
|
CCP Guard
C C P C C P Alliance
5309
|
Posted - 2016.05.15 10:42:49 -
[27] - Quote
Callista Jael wrote:Dierdra Vaal wrote:The very low turnout is rather disappointing, and I believe it is the cause of the overwhelming number of 0.0 bloc candidates on the council (3 goons, 4 pl, and all but one I can identify as 0.0 pilots) which makes me worry for the representation of other gameplay areas by the CSM.
I would like to know what CCP plans to do the coming year (not just during the election) to raise the profile of the CSM with the non-bloc playerbase, as the messaging this election was woefully lacking. Also @ CCP Guard You've been around for a while so maybe you can address what I'm fixing to say. I don't mean this to come across as an attack, but to throw out a few concerns that may or may not have been considered. How many people are so emotionally invested in this game that they're explicitly concerned about its inner development? For instance, I'm happy with the game. I like to see it improve. I like to read peoples input on what should be a focus for expansion. But at the end of the day I occasionally just want to spend an hour or so and relax with a little entertainment, and I would argue that the majority of people feel the same, as opposed to having the resources to absorb ourselves in a gaming universe - whether that happens inside or outside of its reality. Many of us just don't have that luxury, and even if we did there's truth in too much of a good thing, and we burn ourselves out in the process. In a list of priorities there are so many things infinitely more important. Granted, I fully understand the benefits associated with a player elected council. I think it's an awesome idea - IF - the whole campaign process weren't so ridiculous. When I participated in voting on the 2nd council (my first and last voting experience) I remember that not one candidate could introduce himself without an accompanying life story. It was all irrelevant and so very tiring, and I didn't have the time to sift through all of that just to discover that our common interests never went beyond Black Ops battleships and modular stations. I don't care if he was engaged and married to a fellow EVE player. I don't care if he fought in a space battle on the opposite side of the universe. And I don't care if he experienced the Jita rebellion. As far as I'm concerned, low voter turnout is a direct result of an uncaring attitude about the game and its players. We can throw all of our university knowledge and experience to the problem all day long and analyze it until we're crippled, but you'll never get the results you're looking for until the game starts to dramatically affect players lives.
This actually touches on something I've said quite a often which is that we as developers never actually have a direct line of communication or a "relationship" with all our players at once. There are sections of the community that are more invested in the surrounding community and events, and there are others who just log in to play the game and don't mind the other stuff so much. And that's perfectly normal and fine. Our goal with a project such as the CSM is to try to make it as valuable as possible in the eyes of the invested members of the community, and help the CSM deliver value to all EVE players whether they know much about it or not. And another goal is always to increase awareness and interest in the CSM and get more people into the "engaged" segment of the community in general.
In short I'm ok with not everybody caring about the CSM but I'd like to give more people a reason to.
CCP Guard | EVE Community Developer |-á@CCP_Guard
|
|
Circumstantial Evidence
309
|
Posted - 2016.05.15 13:51:21 -
[28] - Quote
CCP Guard, a few CSM10 members have written publicly and extensively about their experiences, and I hope you will take that feedback into consideration. If you're "doing it well" it can be a burn-out unpaid job.
One thing I like about the CSM as a whole is if I have a question that seems to get lost in thousands of other forum postings, I can usually get an answer. They can act as a question filter for developers. Instead of "ask a dev" - "ask a CSM" should be an equally trusted and viable Q&A pathway.
I think CCP uses the CSM appropriately as a body of player experts that can respond to feature ideas and proposed changes, and feedback-gatherers for their areas of interest. Beyond that, CCP may over-sell to the players that the CSM can get changes made in the game, resulting in disappointment when a particular CSM's advocacy for a specific narrow change is not implemented. CSM10 saw a few shout-outs by developers regarding particular CSM's proposed ideas that got implemented, reinforcing the idea that the CSM should be able to "get things done." These few shout-outs were a very rare exception over the course of the year to the daily grind of the CSM's sounding-board feedback job. But a lot of what the CSM tells CCP will not get done: ideas turn out to be very cheap, (or unbalanced,) implementing them is expensive: a harsh reality of software development.
I expect that this term CCP will hear a lot about the concerns of null-sec residents (although that may unfairly brand some CSM11 "null-block" members who do have broad interest in other areas,) resulting in some disappointment by CSM voters, when CCP seems to "ignore" some of their feedback, in order to work on features and changes outside most of CSM11's area of interest.
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5994
|
Posted - 2016.05.15 16:59:12 -
[29] - Quote
Rimstalker wrote:Most people do not vote if they think they do not actually have a say. The most surefire way to cement that idea is to not listen to anything that the people say. We see it all of the time around here...
So CSM is going to do what? What exactly are they going to actually do? Take our concerns to a group of people at CCP who have provided more than ample examples of not giving a damn?:)
Maybe they will "fight for our right to party"? Or pass on incredible insights and awareness along to CCP who has established that they can and will do whatever they want and the player be damned?
Maybe they will represent us so that we have a voice at CCP? Maybe they will do a whole lot of nothing again? I cannot really name 3 things the CSM has ever really done.
Here is a question for the CSM's and CCP and let us see what they are doing or have done:
Name three things that the CSM took from the players and got CCP to do that has improved the game.
That is really their jobs there at the CSM correct? Or are we still clinging to the notion that they get things fixed? Like Fleet Mechanics...how is that coming along? Maybe they are coming up with another awesome mini-game like research the crap cell garbage that is so boring, uneventful that the best part of it was when I realized I didn't have to do and could remove it from my neocom like I do with so much other garbage they have wedged into it.
Maybe they are getting rules standardized so that everyone uses the same set of rules? How amazing would that be? Maybe we could get them to do something about punishments standardized so if someone breaks the rules they get the same punishment applied to them vs. having a friend or two pull some strings and some people get no punishment for violations of rules that get other people banned. Now, that would be progress.
This next CSM election cycle? Vote for me...apparently I am one of the few who does tell the truth.
Which fleet mechanics are you talking about, btw?
If it's boosting, then there is a change coming for that. It just needed CCP to switch out the dogma implementation, and introduce brain in a box, before it was feasible to do. But it's coming, now that the first two are done.
Then there's the fleet api that was recently introduced. It's seeing use in a few places.
How about the market data API? How about the update for it, which will let you get an entire region at once? (the second is coming)
Stuff does happen. Maybe not as far as some people would like, but there are technical blockers on some things.
Woo! CSM XI!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5994
|
Posted - 2016.05.15 17:08:14 -
[30] - Quote
Huang Mo wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:The blocks don't have any secret. Just numbers They have overwhelming numbers, that's the point. The candidates that didn't made it did their very best to rally people behind them but to no avail
Some of them did. Some of them didn't.
I'm proof that you don't need a null block behind you to get onto the CSM. Just engaged players. (Engaged with the community. That can be part of the problem when it comes to, say, getting votes from highsec mission runners. They don't need to be as engaged as, say, someone who PvPs out in Nullsec.
An important point I keep making: People have to know who you are. If they don't, you will _not_ get elected. That's not a flaw in the system, or the electorate. It's a flaw in the candidate. The time to start campaigning is now. Make sure people know who you are, before they even get close to the ballot box.
I've seen some people complaining that the CSM is a popularity contest. Or that it only has celebrities on it. I understand where the complaint is coming from, and it's not wrong. But it is misguided. It's _always_ going to be that way, and there's no good way to stop it. Because to stop it, you need a motivated electorate, who _all_ go out and research every candidate. Yes, there are people who do it. But there's also a large number who can't be bothered. So they just vote for who they know. So make sure your name is in the mouths of others.
Woo! CSM XI!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |