Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 107 post(s) |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 21:29:00 -
[31]
you are comparing eve and real life, ccp nozh has stopped reading
and time to start kissing babies, sounds like a good time
|
Lobster Man
Murder-Death-Kill
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 21:47:00 -
[32]
I think this is a very interesting idea...
|
Vladimir Tinakin
Caldari Hadean Drive Yards Archaean Cooperative
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 21:48:00 -
[33]
Several points: the limit on trips to iceland, does that indicate that travel cost (at least airfare) will be covered by CCP?
I'm assuming that the voting will be handled by an option on the website itself, not an ingame feature. Will this be on a secured part of the site to prevent "voter fraud"? (silly, but it bears mentioning)
How free will the council members be to introduce issues? Will they be constrained to items proposed on the subforum created for the council, or can they bring up items generated in-game?
What steps will be taken to monitor the representatives to prevent "buying" the council vote? Understandably, I don't expect (or want) CCP to require bank statements or other real currency checks, but will the in-game accounts of council members fall under the internal affairs/auditing procedures that CCP employees and affiliates?
Can you offer (hypothetical) examples of what sort of business would be handled by the council and its interaction with the CCP Council? Would the current debate around possible changes to sovereignty and its requirements be a good example of a situation that would be streamlined/organized by the council in the future?
An example that could define the lower end of the council's expected issue range (in terms of scale) might also be useful.
Finally, I don't think council meetings outside of iceland are covered (or I accidentally skipped it). Are we talking Eve-Voice meetings in game, or a private forum, etc?
Thanks for taking this seriously, CCP...this could be yet another innovation for the MMO community to look at. ----------------------------------------------- Adm Vladimir Tinakin CFO Hadean Drive Yards |
Kazuma Saruwatari
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 21:52:00 -
[34]
I am linking my petition regarding this, which includes GM Xhagen's own posts regarding my thread.
Petition regarding the Council of Stellar Management
-
Odd Pod Out, a blog of EVE Online |
Xaen
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 22:04:00 -
[35]
Sounds good, all except for the need to obtain a passport (I've simply never needed one before - rather than being a terrorist or something) and the requirements to travel to Iceland and appear on TV/EON.
When I have the time, I try to devote significant effort to the game to see it improved, but I have to draw the line at flying to Iceland. I'd rather not use vacation time and money on something so nerdy! That and I hate the cold.
Additionally, I feel requirement to travel to Iceland will significantly reduce the influence of the "casual player" on the CSM since the casual player won't be traveling to Iceland just to have a say in a video game's rules.
Also, most internet-spaceship-geeks are not very photogenic, so appearances on EVE TV or in EON may yield less than satisfactory results. For instance, I happen to have what's commonly referred to as a "monitor tan" in some circles. -- Support fixing the EVE UI | Suggest Jita fixes
|
Vladimir Tinakin
Caldari Hadean Drive Yards Archaean Cooperative
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 22:20:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Kazuma Saruwatari I am linking my petition regarding this, which includes GM Xhagen's own posts regarding my thread.
Petition regarding the Council of Stellar Management
It appears that several of your concerns have been addressed--term limits, player not character election, etc.
Still, good points all! ----------------------------------------------- Adm Vladimir Tinakin CFO Hadean Drive Yards |
Kazuma Saruwatari
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 22:23:00 -
[37]
Reason that most of my points have been answered is because my petition is at least a week or so older than the Dev Blog.
It doesnt make it any less useful, however, and I've linked it here for both archive purposes and for other points that either I or GM Xhagen have missed. -
Odd Pod Out, a blog of EVE Online |
Helison
Gallente Times of Ancar Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 22:25:00 -
[38]
Phhh, interesting read, but many questions...
Here we go: *) What do you (CCP) do, if you don¦t find enough canditates for this job? The conditions are very harsh and the the representatives would have to invest very much time and money(probably)into it.
*) What do you do, if too many representatives drop out of the CSM?
*) Why do you plan to restrict the communication between CSM and CCP as much?
*) Proxy Democracy - WHY? I think that THIS will open a really big can of worms. Everybody has to vote himself, or not to vote at all.
*) How about reducing the duration of one period to three months? Eve is evolving very fast and then the voters have more possibility to react to the performance of the representatives.
|
000Hunter000
Gallente Magners Marauders
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 22:31:00 -
[39]
Erm.. no offence to anyone in particular but the idea of some other guy who paid just as much as me will decide what is good for me is.. well.. erm.. BAD??? These guys won't get any real power i hope? just like a sort of spokesperson for the eveplayers and nothing more?
Anyways if we do have to vote i would vote for Chribba CCP, let us pay the online shop with Direct Debit!!! Magners is now recruiting, evemail me or Dagazbo ingame.
|
|
GM Xhagen
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 22:31:00 -
[40]
Hi everybody.
I'm Xhagen and I am largely responsible for this document although I could never have done this alone.
Now that the introductions are over, I will be trying to answer as many questions as possible and try and clarify the issues as best possible.
There is a thread that I have already been posting into, already linked but it doesn't harm to link it again. Here it is. Secondly, we have already in the tubes a 'summary' of sorts of this matter, where the more technical and practical issues are clarified and addressed and I will try and get that out as soon as possible.
So, I will monitor this thread and answer questions as much as I possibly can.
It is important to keep one thing in mind. This is not the final idea and even though this might be started in one form, it does not mean that the whole thing will not be constantly reviewed and further edged out to work better and more smoothly etc. And in the spirit of the CSM we are bringing this up for discussion before taking this further. I believe that discussing things will only make them better. ____________________________
EVE Online EVE Customer Support |
|
|
|
GM Xhagen
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 22:44:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Salvis Tallan Can you elaborate a bit on the CSM's ability to communicate with the CCP council? It says... What kind of questions does this cover, and is it per member of the CSM, or for the CSM in general? If a rep sends an email, or however this will work, containing 100+ questions, what happens?
I would prefer not to decide on a topic as that would automatically restrict or reduce the issues thought of by players. So, in short, the council can bring up anything that is EVE related although we will require the comments or suggestions to be specific and to the point. The topics will be voted on by the CSM, so the CSM as a whole will bring up topics to CCP.
100 well defined and specific topics are a lot of things and I can honestly not promise anything in the nature of numbers in that regards. Hence the CSM will be asked to prioritize them.
Originally by: Salvis Tallan
What if there is some unforseen event (such as a misconduct allegation for example), I assume the CSM will act to work between CCP and the players, will this 2 communication limit be waved for however long it takes to resolve that? Beyond needing clarification on that one part, I think that this is a good initiative. More communication between CCP and the players will work to solve alot of problems.
I say that the correct thing to do should a large, unforeseen event happen, is to inform the CSM about it and what is being done if at all possible. ____________________________
EVE Online EVE Customer Support |
|
|
GM Xhagen
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 22:47:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Doug Gallespie Is CCP paying for the trip to Iceland? If not, it biases the system in favor of those who can afford to travel.
Oh, and is Locke, not Lock.
CCP will be paying for the trip to Iceland, the lodgings there during the stay and basic food requirements. I.e. a council member will not have to spend money to get to Iceland for a meeting. Any additional spendings will have to be handled by the members. ____________________________
EVE Online EVE Customer Support |
|
|
GM Xhagen
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 22:49:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Minnow maught Will the minutes of the meetings between the CSM's and CCP be made public ?
As the CSM minutes will public and hence the player base will most likely know the topics for disccusion at ccp hq on a quarterly basis, it seems only just that these minutes are made public (within the guidelines of the NDA of course).
Either I have misread (quite possible) or there is nothing stated on how this will be handled.
All meeting minutes for officially called CSM meetings will be made public for all to view. All minutes from meetings between the CSM and CCP will also be made public. This is to be a public, open and a transparent operation and thus everything will be logged and published. ____________________________
EVE Online EVE Customer Support |
|
|
GM Xhagen
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 22:51:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Shen Ra I hereby place my vote for sale. Let the bidding begin at 50 mil. Winner gets the vote proxy transferred to them.
The way the system is supposed to work, no one will be able to verify that you actually transferred the vote. Hence, someone buying/bullying/whatevermeans votes will never been able to verify in any form or fashion that the vote is under his control. ____________________________
EVE Online EVE Customer Support |
|
|
GM Xhagen
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 22:58:00 -
[45]
Originally by: CEO Saffron It seems like a very poor idea (queue the kiss up flames).
Here is why. At the moment the forums represent the views of the community, a council will obviously be 'elected' by pressure groups. This means you are likely to have eve being shaped by large self intrested bodies you can guarentee a representitive from the larger alliances for example.
The reason for this election is simple... It doesnt help joe bloggs eve player as this will be nothing more than a popularity contest ...
CCP have put this forward for one purpose... because its easier to MANAGE a council than the community. I prefer a system where EVERYONES opinion carries weight.
I see your point and your point is very valid. It is however our believe that the regular player can approach someone who is running for a seat with more ease than trying to affect CCP via the forums.
We are also fully aware that the elections will be a popularity contest. Sadly all elections are. ____________________________
EVE Online EVE Customer Support |
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 23:00:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Chainsaw Plankton on 14/11/2007 23:03:25
Originally by: GM Xhagen
Originally by: Shen Ra I hereby place my vote for sale. Let the bidding begin at 50 mil. Winner gets the vote proxy transferred to them.
The way the system is supposed to work, no one will be able to verify that you actually transferred the vote. Hence, someone buying/bullying/whatevermeans votes will never been able to verify in any form or fashion that the vote is under his control.
50 mil/vote * about 5-10k = time to buy gtc
will be interesting to see how this goes
*edit*
oh yes and are there anyways to downplay the cannon fodder candidates, aka having lots of candidates is a good/bad thing,
|
|
GM Xhagen
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 23:11:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Sean Livingston
The theory is definately sound, but I have to say that some points seem hazy after looking through the paper.Like, what areas should the council be focused on. I get that they're an intermediary between the community and CCP, but what sort of issues / changes should they be looking for?
I also found myself thinking that a CSM forum, although a great place to discuss final topics with the general population, would be better of if the topics were promoted from other forums in order to keep the CSM area 'Clean' and filled with legitimate ideas.
The areas are not mentioned because of a reason. We do not want to limit the CSM in such ways. Like I stated somewhere here above (in not so many words) is that we want the CSM to act as independently as possible and then present to CCP well defined and clarified topics. The topics have to be reasonable (of course) and make sense. Again, I'm not going to take an example as that would automatically reduce or focus the attention in a certain direction. ____________________________
EVE Online EVE Customer Support |
|
|
GM Xhagen
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 23:23:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Standing Bear This is an interesting concept to apply to a virtual world. I am looking forward to the application of the proposed process.
A question: Would staggering the term lengths of the Council members instead of 100% replacement every six months, provide a smoother process?? If the terms were staggered in thirds than some common knowledge would be carried forward with changes in Council membership. Or is the thought that a complete replacement would set clear timelines for the accomplishment of tasks?
Yes, the staggering of the CSM members was brought up at FanFest and although that might make things smooth, it also adds a new complication level to the entire process and the repeated voting process will further make people more 'disinterested' (like is happening with RL votings) than they already are.
There hasn't been made a decision on this front yet, but this is how things stand at the moment. ____________________________
EVE Online EVE Customer Support |
|
Captin Lawdogg
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 23:35:00 -
[49]
Originally by: CEO Saffron It seems like a very poor idea (queue the kiss up flames).
Here is why. At the moment the forums represent the views of the community, a council will obviously be 'elected' by pressure groups. This means you are likely to have eve being shaped by large self intrested bodies you can guarentee a representitive from the larger alliances for example.
The reason for this election is simple... It doesnt help joe bloggs eve player as this will be nothing more than a popularity contest ...
CCP have put this forward for one purpose... because its easier to MANAGE a council than the community. I prefer a system where EVERYONES opinion carries weight.
I couldn't agree with this more, It seems like most of the patches, nerfs, etc. are geared torwards Alliances, Alliance warfare, etc. CCP doesn't really take into to consideratioon the smaller corps of eve.
I've seens 5-10 friends leave eve all together in the last few months and its kinda sad.
I've never played a game where the Devs show such a blatent bias torwards certain players in the game and its kind of disturbing. Sadly it seems to be the way that eve is going and this is just another addition to the game that will hurt the smaller player in eve and do nothing but help the major alliances.
Anyway, I'm not here to whine, I dont like it so I've stopped playing for the time being, just adding my two cents.
|
Ishina Fel
Caldari Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 23:36:00 -
[50]
I have questions regarding the forum topics marked for resolution. As the whitepaper states, that specific topic must then accumulate positive supporter votes both equal to at least 5% of EVE's total population (hopefully defined by the total number of active paid accounts) and at least twice the number of negative votes to be eligible for discussion in the council. Did I read this correctly?
Now, for my questions:
1.) Do council representatives have the right to grab topics that they deem especially important to the future of EVE and bring them to an escalation vote before the CSM, even if the topic has not yet gathered (or maybe failed to gather) the necessary 5% in votes? I am sort of ambivalent on that issue... on the one hand, this could allow the representatives to promote pet projects, but on the other hand, they also have to get enough of the remaining others to agree to escalate it anyway. Also, this could serve to bring some issues to CCPs attention that are for some reason unpopular or quite simply boring, but no less important. We all know that 99% of the issues brought forth and discussed by players will be buff/nerf ships/races/modules/playstyles threads, which I consider largely irrelevant or useless because only one out of maybe 200 players actually tackles these issues with even close to the necessary insight. And this can very well spam important issues away that simply do not generate as much traffic as "gief explosive lasers" does.
2.) Since threads marked for resolution must surpass this hard minimum hurdle of support to be considered for escalation, does the proxy voting work for this? I believe that the proxy democracy is an inherently necessary element in this endeavour, because EVE is a society made up of members of every possible nationality, but CSM issues are discussed only on a strictly English forum. The very structure of an MMO maximizes the silent majority in the playerbase, which will never participate in (or even read) the CSM forum discussions. Therefore I strongly recommend instating proxy support voting for 'resolution threads'.
I hope I was able to get my concerns across clearly and again, I have no clear opinion on issue 1, I just wanted to raise it.
|
|
|
GM Xhagen
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 23:39:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Elseer Radak Hi,
This is a great idea but it contains a significant flaw : The need to travel to Iceland and acquire lodging at one's own expense. Some means of paying for this needs to be thought out or the matter will effectively be open only to folks who leave in or near Iceland meaning Mostly Europe & Scandinavia. US, Canadian, Far Eastern Europe & Russian folks might be able to swing this for a few thousand dollars. I expect the cost to Asian, Australians etc will be quite a bit higher.
So some method of raising "campaign funds" needs to be arranged and perhaps locking those funds so their total caps out at the cost of the corporate airfare and lodging for that participant to visit these meetings.
Again, the travels and lodgings and basic maintenance will be provided for by CCP.
Originally by: Elseer Radak
Initially I thought that using ISK to raise these funs would be a great idea. However, that raises the issues of ISK having a real word value and thus attracting all sorts of ugly tax issues and possibly breaking the Eula. So it's likely real world monies would need to be used so care full thought on this matter is needed.
Next, travel to Iceland might be problematic for representative of certain in game power blocks see Who does not need a visa to enter Iceland as you can see the list countries, member of large alliances from China, Russia, The various old Soviet era states, etc are not on that list. Getting these players the needed documents could take some time and cause them to miss out on meetings.
This brings me to My second big issue: Language. One of the endearing properties of Eve is it's diverse population. Non-English speaking folks represent a significant portion of the Eve Population. Steps will be needed to address the issues around Language -- especially given the large groups of Russian, Asian German, Hungarian and probably several other major world languages each hold sway over major in game alliances. Some accommodations for these delicate issues will need to be made and done in a open and public fashion so each power block can feel empowered to appoint representatives of their interests. Otherwise, if accommodation cannot be made, fluency in English (or other language CCP could easily accommodate) should be an added characteristic to whatever person is represented to the council.
Elseer R.
This point was brought up at FanFest and this point is very valid. At CCP there are people from all over the world so asking them to translate during the meetings in Iceland should not have to be a problem (I will ask them nicely). To be clear, I do not foresee this as a reason for someone 'not' to try and get into the council. But this has been on our minds and I am sure that a solution can be found. ____________________________
EVE Online EVE Customer Support |
|
|
GM Xhagen
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 23:56:00 -
[52]
Originally by: qantua gnartians
Besides the interesting politial theory something is missing and that is the original purpose of the councul as a watch dog towards actual collusion(as with the t20 incident).
As far as i can see the IA devission will not be answering to the new CSM, am i missing something or does this mean that we are getting something different then we were promised, back when the storm of the scandals were raging?
Did The oversight commission got turned into a overly complicated council of community trusted beta testers that CCP dont even have to listen to.
The incident you mention has already been handled and you can read about how it was handled in the dev blogs that were published about that. I believe you also answered you question as well when you said "back when the storm..." This has already been dealt with and it is time to look at EVE as something that is more than 'just' a game. It is a game and can be enjoyed as such, but one can also decide to try and affect it.
____________________________
EVE Online EVE Customer Support |
|
Selene D'Celeste
Caldari The D'Celeste Estate
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 00:22:00 -
[53]
I haven't finished reading the document, and you keep posting replies faster than the playerbase can ask more questions. You're making it impossible for me to catch up and throw new questions at you, stop doing your job so well =D
Seriously though, it looks like a lot of valid points are already being raised. I'll see what I can contribute in a bit.
|
Verite Rendition
Caldari F.R.E.E. Explorer Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 00:23:00 -
[54]
Do the ISK farmers get a vote too? There's certainly enough of them that they could have a few spots to themselves. ---- FREE Explorer Lead Megalomanic EVE Automated Influence Map |
violator2k5
Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 00:33:00 -
[55]
my only concerns are to do with the voting process. you said that it would be a vote to show who is the most popular but shouldnt you actually set it right so that those who are up for the vote are actually able to make those trips.
Real life may be keeping them away for reasons known only to them.
also how are the votes going to be done? is it by character, by account, by contact name for those who have multiple accounts?
i really hope the answer to that is the last option ---------------------------- BOB 4 LIFE NOT JUST 4 A DAY ----------------------------
|
Selene D'Celeste
Caldari The D'Celeste Estate
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 00:34:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Verite Rendition Do the ISK farmers get a vote too? There's certainly enough of them that they could have a few spots to themselves.
So what we really need are elected lobbyists for each cause? Nice. You can me Map API support lobby guy, and I can be the lobby guy for the pro-tritanium movement. =D
Looking this over more, it seems that the way the voting is handled is probably the most crucial element here. The populatity contest, blocks of players getting a representative elected, etc ... these are all unavoidable and probably healthy. We'd want a diverse group of people on such a council. The difficult part is in balancing the way their power is expressed. Also I think we all know the forum whining isn't going away, this is just an attempt to make a more refined version of it for easier digestion =D
|
Vladimir Tinakin
Caldari Hadean Drive Yards Archaean Cooperative
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 00:45:00 -
[57]
Originally by: violator2k5 my only concerns are to do with the voting process. you said that it would be a vote to show who is the most popular but shouldnt you actually set it right so that those who are up for the vote are actually able to make those trips.
Real life may be keeping them away for reasons known only to them.
also how are the votes going to be done? is it by character, by account, by contact name for those who have multiple accounts?
i really hope the answer to that is the last option
It was covered in the white paper...
Candidacy is a voluntary process--that is, you have to declare yourself in the race to be running. So if you have RL issues that would prevent you from performing your role, ideally you wouldn't run at all.
If something were to happen after the fact, you would have to step down and one of the 5 alternates would rotate in to take your place on the council.
As for voting, it is one vote per account. Yes, that gives people with multiple accounts more voting power than someone with a single account, but the view taken is that those extra 3-4 votes will not amount to anything approaching significant when looking at the total pool of 200,000 votes. One vote per account is the best solution, all things considered--one per character is of course silly, and trying to narrow voting down to one per paying customer period would involve creating new mechanisms for identifying and authenticating that person from scratch...ultimately its not worth it to ensure one person, one vote as opposed to one person, two-three votes (average number of alt accounts).
So the most popular people would be a shoe-in if they run (chribba <3) but there is a point of diminished returns--if 100,000 people vote chribba: great, he's elected....but the remaining 8 slots are now elected based on the remaining 100,000 votes. So there is definitely plenty of room for dark horse candidates and less-popularly-known people.
Plus, thats assuming we get 100% of the 200k accounts voting. If RL voting is any indicator, expect 50-75% of that to actually cast a ballot. Playing field narrows further. ----------------------------------------------- Adm Vladimir Tinakin CFO Hadean Drive Yards |
Adunh Slavy
KIA Corp KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 00:52:00 -
[58]
IÆve some concerns with a two items, proxy and account status.
ôThe transferring player will not have any control or knowledge of how the proxy vote is cast by the receiving player, but may rescind that proxy vote at any time prior to the close of pollsö
This is a bad idea. There should be no mechanism by which any player can grant proxy rights to another player ever. It can lead to far too many problems, such as membership to a corp demands the granting of proxy rights, players being forced to grant proxy rights under threat of piracy or harassment or meta-gaming etc.
ôPlayers receiving proxy votes will not know the names of anyone transferring votes to them. Instead, they will only have a counter displaying how many proxies they have receivedö
Ok, so Joe Noob connects, gets into a corp and then one day corp says to joe noob, ôGive us your proxy vote right now or you will be podded! Yarrö and the Yarr Party watches the little counter to see if joe noob has done as was demanded.
Job Noob is forced to give the vote or forced to deal with 24 hours to remove roles, which he probably does not understand at all, and the CEO or director now griefs poor joe noob with more roles until joe noob finally gets and answer from a GM, which he probably also does not know how to contact. This scenario sucks for joe noob or any one else in any alliance or corp or NPC corp. It can lead to numerous strong arm tactics used against players in and out of game.
Ok so Joe noob forced to give his proxy, but ôWait!ö you scream, joe noob can rescind his proxy via the statement from the CSM,ö .. but may rescind that proxy vote at any time prior to the close of polls à ô So what? Joe noob probably has no idea about how any of this works, much less how to fit a cruise missile launcher on his shiny new Vexor à yeah, it happens.
This proxy provision is an opportunity for problems.
Also, I see no provision for account status with regards to a paid in full subscription, be it paid via GTCs, credit card or chicken eggs. In my view, only currently active accounts should be eligible to vote. Now perhaps this need not be included because, to access the forum/voting area, one would need an active account to get there in the first place. Fine. However, IÆd much rather see it spelled out in the rules than an unspoken rule that could possibly be circumvented by unforeseen future changes in how a web page works.
Other than these two things, it looked pretty good to me.
-AS
The Real Space Initiative (Forum Link) |
violator2k5
Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 01:07:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin Plus, thats assuming we get 100% of the 200k accounts voting. If RL voting is any indicator, expect 50-75% of that to actually cast a ballot. Playing field narrows further.
humm, well it is to be expected, i mean not everyone visits the forum so i doubt they'll visit the site much either.
it would be nice if it was 1 person 1 vote, ah well. ---------------------------- BOB 4 LIFE NOT JUST 4 A DAY ----------------------------
|
Vladimir Tinakin
Caldari Hadean Drive Yards Archaean Cooperative
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 01:27:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Adunh Slavy
ôPlayers receiving proxy votes will not know the names of anyone transferring votes to them. Instead, they will only have a counter displaying how many proxies they have receivedö
Ok, so Joe Noob connects, gets into a corp and then one day corp says to joe noob, ôGive us your proxy vote right now or you will be podded! Yarrö and the Yarr Party watches the little counter to see if joe noob has done as was demanded.
Originally by: GM Xhagen
The way the system is supposed to work, no one will be able to verify that you actually transferred the vote. Hence, someone buying/bullying/whatevermeans votes will never been able to verify in any form or fashion that the vote is under his control.
----------------------------------------------- Adm Vladimir Tinakin CFO Hadean Drive Yards |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |