| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Talkuth Rel
Minmatar
Republic Military School
    |
Posted - 2008.04.26 14:30:00 -
[31]
Sorry OZ, that was a lot of political double-speak that really didn't answer many of my questions.
It is impossible to represent "everyone," as everyone is divided on most issues. Claiming you can is either naievete on your part, or willful deception and political pandering. You can't change the fact that at some point or another you will have to choose sides in a discussion. On the CSM, when an issue is discussed, you will have to cast a vote one way or the other. Or do you intend to constantly abstain? Frankly, you are not inspiring confidence in your decision-making abilities, and you sound too much like a politician avoiding the issues and instead using flowery, idealistic speech in an attempt to garner favor with everyone.
I will restate the question directly: How do you plan to represent "everyone" when the playerbase has differing opinions on the issues?
As a sub-question: Since it is impossible to truly represent everyone, why don't you feel that voters deserve some insight into your thoughts, some indication on what you consider important? You claim that you do in fact have opinions on the issues, if this is true, why should you not share these opinions? Do you feel that they are unpopular and will prevent your election? Frankly, I'd think that not giving voters the whole picture would do more to hurt your chances than being open and honest about your ideas. Unless of course they are so far out there and essentially damaging to the game as a whole, in which case you'd have no business being on the CSM in the first place.
As to your ideas on the Borda system, your theory only holds true as long as each alliance is limited to one candidate. The moment a large organized alliance can put forth multiple candidates, the system breaks down. It is possible to distribte votes in such a fashion that they can elect multiple members of their group. For example, even with the single vote system in place now, it is mathematically feasible for the GoonSwarm to put a few of their six candidates on the CSM. With the Borda system, they would have an even stronger ability to do so, and could probably successfully elect a larger number of their representatives.
|
Omber Zombie
Gallente
Frontier Technologies
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 16:23:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: Talkuth Rel
It is impossible to represent "everyone," as everyone is divided on most issues. Claiming you can is either naievete on your part, or willful deception and political pandering. You can't change the fact that at some point or another you will have to choose sides in a discussion. On the CSM, when an issue is discussed, you will have to cast a vote one way or the other. Or do you intend to constantly abstain?
No I intend to ignore my personal stance and hear the arguments from all sides and then make a decision based on facts rather than my original personal opinion.
Quote:
Frankly, you are not inspiring confidence in your decision-making abilities, and you sound too much like a politician avoiding the issues and instead using flowery, idealistic speech in an attempt to garner favor with everyone.
Fair enough. If you think my decision making abilities are completely based on how I personally feel about subjects then please don't vote for me. The CSM is a political entity, I thought being a politician is part of the job description of a council member. Specifically "an individual who is involved in influencing public decisionmaking through the influence of politics or a person who influences the way a society is governed through an understanding of political power and group dynamics. "
Quote:
I will restate the question directly: How do you plan to represent "everyone" when the playerbase has differing opinions on the issues?
As above
Quote:
As a sub-question: Since it is impossible to truly represent everyone, why don't you feel that voters deserve some insight into
your thoughts, some indication on what you consider important? You claim that you do in fact have opinions on the issues, if this is true, why should you not share these opinions? Do you feel that they are unpopular and will prevent your election? Frankly, I'd think that not giving voters the whole picture would do more to hurt your chances than being open and honest about your ideas. Unless of course they are so far out there and essentially damaging to the game as a whole, in which case you'd have no business being on the CSM in the first place.
I do share my opinions, I just choose not to make my own threads about them. I think you'll find a reply of mine in every thread regarding issues asking for CSM candidate opinions.
Quote:
As to your ideas on the Borda system, your theory only holds true as long as each alliance is limited to one candidate. The moment a large organized alliance can put forth multiple candidates, the system breaks down. It is possible to distribte votes in such a fashion that they can elect multiple members of their group. For example, even with the single vote system in place now, it is mathematically feasible for the GoonSwarm to put a few of their six candidates on the CSM. With the Borda system, they would have an even stronger ability to do so, and could probably successfully elect a larger number of their representatives.
It is currently mathematically possible for goonswarm to hold a majority on the council (5 seats) under the current system. Hell they could mathematically hold all 14 positions depending on voter turnout. While I don't like the thought of that as I would rather a diverse group of players across the eve community, if the rest of the community is so apathetic as to allow that to happen - so be it. They are a part of the community too, and if elected they will either do their job or be removed by CCP and a new election will be held.
----------------------
CSM 08 Blog | 1st Campaign Vid |
Talkuth Rel
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 17:43:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Omber Zombie
Originally by: Talkuth Rel
It is impossible to represent "everyone," as everyone is divided on most issues. Claiming you can is either naievete on your part, or willful deception and political pandering. You can't change the fact that at some point or another you will have to choose sides in a discussion. On the CSM, when an issue is discussed, you will have to cast a vote one way or the other. Or do you intend to constantly abstain?
No I intend to ignore my personal stance and hear the arguments from all sides and then make a decision based on facts rather than my original personal opinion.
Wanting to make an informed decision is fine, but once informed you have to make a judgement based on your ideas, understanding, experience, views, and opinions. Every case will have facts on both sides. How you plan to evaluate those facts is what I'm asking for.
There are already many issues currently being discussed by the playerbase. If you do not have enough information for a decision, it is not for a lack of available information, but willful ignorance. If you cannot evaluate facts now, why should you be believed capable of doing so later? Originally by: Omber Zombie
Quote:
Frankly, you are not inspiring confidence in your decision-making abilities, and you sound too much like a politician avoiding the issues and instead using flowery, idealistic speech in an attempt to garner favor with everyone.
Fair enough. If you think my decision making abilities are completely based on how I personally feel about subjects then please don't vote for me. The CSM is a political entity, I thought being a politician is part of the job description of a council member. Specifically "an individual who is involved in influencing public decisionmaking through the influence of politics or a person who influences the way a society is governed through an understanding of political power and group dynamics. "
Now you're really pushing it, you've turned my words backwards and taken my comments completely out of context. I do not believe that your decision making ability is based on how you "feel." Just the opposite, I believe that your rational, informed opinions are evidence of your decisions and the process by which you form those ideas. I did not say the problem was "being a politicion," did I? I said it was being "like a politician avoiding the issues and instead using flowery, idealistic speech in an attempt to garner favor with everyone." It is a complete phrase, you can't take one word and ignore the rest, it loses its meaning. Somehow I don't think that avoiding issues is part of CSM duties.
Originally by: Omber Zombie
Quote:
I will restate the question directly: How do you plan to represent "everyone" when the playerbase has differing opinions on the issues?
As above
And here you've done it again, completely ignored a direct question and left it unanswered.
For the third time: An issue is presented. Points for and against have been given. Facts on both sides have been shown. There are players on both sides of the issue. How do you choose which side to support? How can you represent "everyone" when "everyone" is divided? If you say "I'll do what's best for the game," then that's another cop out, as the future effects are unproven and unknown, and so the decision becomes largely one of opinion. Opinions which you refuse to disclose. We want to know what you think is best for the game before we trust you to do it.
|
Talkuth Rel
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 17:44:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Omber Zombie
Quote:
As a sub-question: Since it is impossible to truly represent everyone, why don't you feel that voters deserve some insight into
your thoughts, some indication on what you consider important? You claim that you do in fact have opinions on the issues, if this is true, why should you not share these opinions? Do you feel that they are unpopular and will prevent your election? Frankly, I'd think that not giving voters the whole picture would do more to hurt your chances than being open and honest about your ideas. Unless of course they are so far out there and essentially damaging to the game as a whole, in which case you'd have no business being on the CSM in the first place.
I do share my opinions, I just choose not to make my own threads about them. I think you'll find a reply of mine in every thread regarding issues asking for CSM candidate opinions.
Then post them on your campaign site. Make them loud and clear. Let people know where you stand. The only reason not to do so is if you fear your opinions would be damaging to your campaign.
Originally by: Omber Zombie
Quote:
As to your ideas on the Borda system, your theory only holds true as long as each alliance is limited to one candidate. The moment a large organized alliance can put forth multiple candidates, the system breaks down. It is possible to distribte votes in such a fashion that they can elect multiple members of their group. For example, even with the single vote system in place now, it is mathematically feasible for the GoonSwarm to put a few of their six candidates on the CSM. With the Borda system, they would have an even stronger ability to do so, and could probably successfully elect a larger number of their representatives.
It is currently mathematically possible for goonswarm to hold a majority on the council (5 seats) under the current system. Hell they could mathematically hold all 14 positions depending on voter turnout. While I don't like the thought of that as I would rather a diverse group of players across the eve community, if the rest of the community is so apathetic as to allow that to happen - so be it. They are a part of the community too, and if elected they will either do their job or be removed by CCP and a new election will be held.
The Borda system gives them an even greater chance of controlling the CSM with no votes from outside their alliance. As you seem to oppose the idea of a disproportionate representation, or a non-diverse council, why would you advocate a system that enables such an outcome?
|
Omber Zombie
Gallente
Frontier Technologies
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 18:14:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Talkuth Rel
There are already many issues currently being discussed by the playerbase. If you do not have enough information for a decision, it is not for a lack of available information, but willful ignorance. If you cannot evaluate facts now, why should you be believed capable of doing so later?
Since you're accusing me of not reading what you write, I'll throw it straight back at you - read my responses in the threads that have been started. Since I amn ot on the council yet, and as such have no ability to argue 'my thoughts' in any other way, I'm not exactly sure what you are asking for here other than being facetious for the sake of trying to prove a point that has already been shown to be an invalid argument. I'm not ignoring the issues, I'm just pointing out that there is no point arguing them if there will be no result from it.
Quote:
Now you're really pushing it, you've turned my words backwards and taken my comments completely out of context. I do not believe that your decision making ability is based on how you "feel." Just the opposite, I believe that your rational, informed opinions are evidence of your decisions and the process by which you form those ideas. I did not say the problem was "being a politicion," did I? I said it was being "like a politician avoiding the issues and instead using flowery, idealistic speech in an attempt to garner favor with everyone." It is a complete phrase, you can't take one word and ignore the rest, it loses its meaning. Somehow I don't think that avoiding issues is part of CSM duties.
Again, I'm not avoiding issues, you just seemtobe avoiding my answers where they are most appropriate: in the threads discussing them.
Quote:
And here you've done it again, completely ignored a direct question and left it unanswered.
For the third time: An issue is presented. Points for and against have been given. Facts on both sides have been shown. There are players on both sides of the issue. How do you choose which side to support? How can you represent "everyone" when "everyone" is divided? If you say "I'll do what's best for the game," then that's another cop out, as the future effects are unproven and unknown, and so the decision becomes largely one of opinion. Opinions which you refuse to disclose. We want to know what you think is best for the game before we trust you to do it.
I'm pretty sure I already answered your question - I obviously have my own opinion about a topic, but I'm not willing to vote on my opinion until all the facts are heard from every side of the argument. If I personally think that the issue is detrimental to what I perceive as the best option for the game, but am convinced otherwise by discussion, I am willing to change my personal stance. For that reason, what I personally think is the correct decision is irrelevant at the start of the discussion as it's open enough to be swayed by intelligent debate.
If you want a more direct answer on what "I think the best for the game is" then I can only summarise it as - Eve is a sandbox that should allow players to do what they want within the laws of the game without limits. This is a game about community interaction and competition, and anything that stops that from happening I don't consider 'best for the game'.
----------------------
CSM 08 Blog | 1st Campaign Vid |
Omber Zombie
Gallente
Frontier Technologies
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 18:18:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Talkuth Rel
Then post them on your campaign site. Make them loud and clear. Let people know where you stand. The only reason not to do so is if you fear your opinions would be damaging to your campaign.
What you want and what I want are obviously 2 very different things. Again, if you don't like the way I am running my campaign, please don't vote for me. I don't see the need to do as you have written above, and more than likely I will pay for it in votes, but I guess I am just stubborn like that.
Quote:
The Borda system gives them an even greater chance of controlling the CSM with no votes from outside their alliance. As you seem to oppose the idea of a disproportionate representation, or a non-diverse council, why would you advocate a system that enables such an outcome?
The Borda system allows the community a greater chance to support a wider diversity, my issue with the current system is the limitation it creates initially, not it's final effect. That is why I prefer the Borda system even if it creates the chance for a disproportionate representation it gives a larger chance for a more diverse representation than the existing system.
----------------------
CSM 08 Blog | 1st Campaign Vid |
Talkuth Rel
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 18:55:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Omber Zombie
Originally by: Talkuth Rel
...
Since you're accusing me of not reading what you write, I'll throw it straight back at you - read my responses in the threads that have been started. Since I amn ot on the council yet, and as such have no ability to argue 'my thoughts' in any other way, I'm not exactly sure what you are asking for here other than being facetious for the sake of trying to prove a point that has already been shown to be an invalid argument. I'm not ignoring the issues, I'm just pointing out that there is no point arguing them if there will be no result from it.
The "result" is that the voters would know something useful about you. Apparently, you don't want that.
Why should I have to hunt for your position? You are the one running for office, you should be making your position clear in your own documentation. You have a blog, yet as it is it says nothing useful about you. If you think this point is somehow "invalid," then I'm afraid you are quite mistaken. If you cannot see why it is important, then in my opinion you have no business representing anyone.
I'm sorry OZ, I feel I have given you every chance here. Instead you have proven yourself to be a typical politician in the worst sense, refusing to make definitive statements one way or another, dodging and avoiding giving answers to direct questions, ignoring inconvenient realities, and refusing to take a stand on what you believe important, all for the fear of offending one group or another. You try to appeal to everyone by doing nothing. The problem with politicians of this mold is once elected, they either continue to do nothing, or only work for their own interest. The people cannot complain that they aren't living up to campaign promises, as they never delivered any promises.
You're a blank check, an unknown quantity, and that is dangerous. You have made it clear that you have something to hide, and for that I believe players should be suspicious of you.
|
Talkuth Rel
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 18:58:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Talkuth Rel on 26/04/2008 18:59:05
Originally by: Omber Zombie
Originally by: Talkuth Rel
The Borda system gives them an even greater chance of controlling the CSM with no votes from outside their alliance. As you seem to oppose the idea of a disproportionate representation, or a non-diverse council, why would you advocate a system that enables such an outcome?
The Borda system allows the community a greater chance to support a wider diversity, my issue with the current system is the limitation it creates initially, not it's final effect. That is why I prefer the Borda system even if it creates the chance for a disproportionate representation it gives a larger chance for a more diverse representation than the existing system.
The problem is that it in fact does not give a chance for a more diverse representation than the existing system. One vote per player means that all those of one ideal are likely to throw their votes behind a single candidate. This leaves openings to be filled by candidates who represent ideas with a smaller supporting base, allowing the possibiltiy that each seat on the council would be filled by someone of a different mindset and view, the very definition of diversity.
The fact is that the Borda system in truth does the opposite of what you seem to believe it does. It gives greater power to a large, organized group, who instead of being able to fill one or maybe two positions on the council, could in all likelihood fill a majority of the seats. Get two major opposing views involved, and it becomes very possible that there will only ever be two views represented on the council. How is this more diverse?
I'll agree that the system as is may not be perfect, but you are wholly mistaken if you believe the Borda system will promote diversity. The problem is that a true Borda system is intended for a single-winner election, not one with multiple seats. It fills it's intentions rather nicely in its intended use, typically selecting a candidate more acceptable to a larger portion of the populace than a straight vote. However once you change the circumstances to a multi-winner model, you've changed the dynamics of the situation, and it does not function the same way.
A Quota Borda system is better designed to handle the intricacies of multiple-winner elections, but the problem is that it is intended for proportional representation. In order for it to work, you have to have clearly defined groups of voters. How do you intend to classify the players of EVE? By corp/alliance? You'll end up with a massive number of groups, far too many to work with the system. By playstyle? This would be a little better for dividing groups according to issues, but how would you define what makes someone an industrialist, or a pirate, or a mission runner, etc.? People would have to self-identify with various groups to represent their ideas and issues, and currently this is not the case. If the CSM is a success and continues, it is quite possible that such groups will evolve. When this happens, such a system may be appropriate, but it cannot work in the situation as it is now.
|
Curzon Dax
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 19:02:00 -
[39]
I think Omber Zombie is a longer standing member of the community than any other player who applied to the CSM stuff. I mean...how many of those names are familiar to any of the forum people?
I'd vote for ya!
 |
Talkuth Rel
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 19:22:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Curzon Dax
I think Omber Zombie is a longer standing member of the community than any other player who applied to the CSM stuff. I mean...how many of those names are familiar to any of the forum people?
I'd vote for ya!
So it's a popularity contest then? Whoever has the most recognizable name wins?
|
|
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Trinity Nova Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 20:12:00 -
[41]
o0o the no doubt coveted endorsement of #1 EVE funny man Curzon Dax.
Clearly, this put the CSM forum idea over the top, meaning this campaign has won a victory for change.
Zombie Apocalypse Guitar-Wielding Superteam |
Hohne
Antares Fleet Yards
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.01 19:29:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Hohne on 01/05/2008 19:29:44
You want a preferential voting system, IMO the Single transferable vote version is better, they use it for elections here. It actually works against larger organisations, but it also works against radical minorities. Because your larger organisation will put up six candidates, and maybe they do get 1-2, but the vast majority of other people who perhaps despise those six candidates are guaranteed of electing someone else in preference to them. Basically, it lets you say I prefer this guy, then this guy, then this guy. And your vote always counts. Even if you vote for someone that gets 10 votes, as long as your preferences are filled in, you keep getting to decided amoung the remaining candidates once one is elminiated etc. Just about all the other methods mean that you can get voters un-intentionally using their vote to support someone they don't want, but throwing it against someone that doesn't make it / already has enough support etc.
This is of course probably alot harder to implement as it requires more thiking than just 1 vote for 1 person, but it's the fairest.
|
Hohne
Antares Fleet Yards
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.01 19:38:00 -
[43]
Also, all my interactions with Omber Zombie (some years ago now) indicate he's worthy of a vote ;)
|
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |