EVE Search - Dear CCP; CSM needs to disband and reformat.

All Channels

Assembly Hall

Dear CCP; CSM needs to disband and reformat.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Aynen	Posted - 2010.01.27 18:52:00 - [91] Just for the sake of argument, and 'food for thought', what if the CSM wasn't a democratic system but a form of isocrazy. (a system where every individual has equal ruling power) This would play itself out (in theory) as follows: Through a series of questions, issues raised, surveys, etc. available from inside the game every player can voice his/her opinion and the results go directly to CCP's analists, bypassing a councel. This makes the whole councel absolete, and the only data available to CCP would be scientific data. The only people analyzing the data would be people with Phd's in statistics and whathaveyou. Any player can create a survey question, and any player can answer survey questions. The analists pass on the survey results to CCP's game designers and they figure out how to turn that into game adjustments. In that system there's very little room for corruption, and the 'tyrany of the majority' doesn't apply either because game designers have the final call, not the majority. Your thoughts?
Syringe Incura	Posted - 2010.01.27 19:15:00 - [92] Originally by: Aynen Just for the sake of argument, and 'food for thought', what if the CSM wasn't a democratic system but a form of isocrazy. (a system where every individual has equal ruling power) This would play itself out (in theory) as follows: Through a series of questions, issues raised, surveys, etc. available from inside the game every player can voice his/her opinion and the results go directly to CCP's analists, bypassing a councel. This makes the whole councel absolete, and the only data available to CCP would be scientific data. The only people analyzing the data would be people with Phd's in statistics and whathaveyou. Any player can create a survey question, and any player can answer survey questions. The analists pass on the survey results to CCP's game designers and they figure out how to turn that into game adjustments. In that system there's very little room for corruption, and the 'tyrany of the majority' doesn't apply either because game designers have the final call, not the majority. Your thoughts? Sounds an awful lot like "design-by-committee". I don't know if you've ever been down that road, but it's not pretty. --------- War isn't the answer. However, the objective isn't to provide answers rather than eliminate the question.
Aynen	Posted - 2010.01.27 19:21:00 - [93] Originally by: Syringe Sounds an awful lot like "design-by-committee". I don't know if you've ever been down that road, but it's not pretty. Not really what I ment. It's not like majority rules, in the end the game designers make all the game design desissions, it's just that the filtering system between the players and CCP is less corrupt this way.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Looney Toons.	Posted - 2010.01.27 21:23:00 - [94] We need a CSM that's accountable for there actions... No CSM is worse. Current CSM "system" is an insult but its better than nothing. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com =========================
Aynen	Posted - 2010.01.27 23:18:00 - [95] Originally by: Drake Draconis We need a CSM that's accountable for there actions... No CSM is worse. Current CSM "system" is an insult but its better than nothing. I think some accountability could improve the current system, but how do you execute it?
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Looney Toons.	Posted - 2010.01.27 23:22:00 - [96] If I knew the answer to that question I'd come up with it. For starters... these cannidates only get in with there massive alliance posse's backing them. Not all CSM's are elected this way... but anyone in goonswarm... PL.... or any other others... are likely to win either way. So player participation is a big problem as a result. But who keeps CSM in check when they go about there business? Don't know how to solve that problem. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com =========================
Aynen	Posted - 2010.01.28 00:52:00 - [97] Originally by: Drake Draconis If I knew the answer to that question I'd come up with it. For starters... these cannidates only get in with there massive alliance posse's backing them. Not all CSM's are elected this way... but anyone in goonswarm... PL.... or any other others... are likely to win either way. So player participation is a big problem as a result. But who keeps CSM in check when they go about there business? Don't know how to solve that problem. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. I suppose the problem would be reduced if people could not vote on a member of their own alliance. This ofcourse brings forth a host of other problems, but it might still be worth it.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Looney Toons.	Posted - 2010.01.28 01:06:00 - [98] Originally by: Aynen Originally by: Drake Draconis If I knew the answer to that question I'd come up with it. For starters... these cannidates only get in with there massive alliance posse's backing them. Not all CSM's are elected this way... but anyone in goonswarm... PL.... or any other others... are likely to win either way. So player participation is a big problem as a result. But who keeps CSM in check when they go about there business? Don't know how to solve that problem. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. I suppose the problem would be reduced if people could not vote on a member of their own alliance. This of course brings forth a host of other problems, but it might still be worth it. I thought about that... but then the REALLY good people who have large alliances backing them would be cut off as well. Nasty pickle to be sure. You should start a different thread about this... this thread is not what I call a good way of discussing the CSM troubles. As I think disbanding them is a baaaad idea. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com =========================
Larkonis TrassIer Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.01.28 01:10:00 - [99]
KAT3	Posted - 2010.01.28 02:00:00 - [100] Edited by: KAT3 on 28/01/2010 02:02:19 Edited by: KAT3 on 28/01/2010 02:01:38 The only accountability an elected CMS representative or any elected official has is to the ballot box. Likewise, the only tool the membership has is to exercise their voice and approval or disapproval thru the ballot box. I understand all the issues and concerns laid out from not enough information on canditates, to large alliances casting majority votes for their pet member, to the memberships' inability to do anything about the poor performance of an elected CMS representative. The process however, is like any other democratic process, and unless the membership really gets involved, these problems will not be mitigated. I would concentrate more on the election process and attempting to better inform and motivate the member base. They need to feel comfortable that they have the information they need to place an educated vote for a particular candidate to represent them, and motivated that their representatives and the CMS system will repond as intended -- on behalf of the membership base.
Aynen	Posted - 2010.01.28 08:15:00 - [101] Originally by: Drake Draconis Originally by: Aynen I suppose the problem would be reduced if people could not vote on a member of their own alliance. This of course brings forth a host of other problems, but it might still be worth it. I thought about that... but then the REALLY good people who have large alliances backing them would be cut off as well. Nasty pickle to be sure. You should start a different thread about this... this thread is not what I call a good way of discussing the CSM troubles. As I think disbanding them is a baaaad idea. Well, as I said a couple of posts ago, I actually feel that taking the human factor of the CSM out of the picture is what'll fix our problems. It wouldn't really be a csm anymore though. Just give players the ability to get their opinions directly to CCP in the form of survey results and you won't need a CSM.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Looney Toons.	Posted - 2010.01.28 15:39:00 - [102] You can never take the human factor out of any group of people. CCP included. The fact this is a democractic process is a insult in itself. Democracy implies people are discerning enough to know the difference between good and bad... in the end all a democratic process gets you is a popularity stunt. Like it is in real life.... which doesn't really matter a whole heck of a lot even today. (Thank you oh so very much college electoral) Such things translate to the current CSM... you have a "democratic" process of election (note the quote marks ;) ) and then you look at who really votes? Therein is your problem. I didn't vote last time around because A: I was very tired and lazy. B: I had no incentive to vote let alone lift a damn finger because I was so **ed off at Mazz and Lark for the bull** stunt they pulled. People are going to react just like I did.... Why bother? Why should they vote when its a laughing stock? We are just single individual pilots... how many votes will it take before someone can make a difference? In the end... its a futile gesture to even vote. Fix that problem... and you'll get somewhere. Give the people an incentive to vote. (NO not bribing : O P ) ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com =========================
Aynen	Posted - 2010.01.28 15:58:00 - [103] Originally by: Drake Draconis You can never take the human factor out of any group of people. CCP included. The fact this is a democractic process is a insult in itself. Democracy implies people are discerning enough to know the difference between good and bad... in the end all a democratic process gets you is a popularity stunt. Like it is in real life.... which doesn't really matter a whole heck of a lot even today. (Thank you oh so very much college electoral) Such things translate to the current CSM... you have a "democratic" process of election (note the quote marks ;) ) and then you look at who really votes? Therein is your problem. I didn't vote last time around because A: I was very tired and lazy. B: I had no incentive to vote let alone lift a damn finger because I was so **ed off at Mazz and Lark for the bull** stunt they pulled. People are going to react just like I did.... Why bother? Why should they vote when its a laughing stock? We are just single individual pilots... how many votes will it take before someone can make a difference? In the end... its a futile gesture to even vote. Fix that problem... and you'll get somewhere. Give the people an incentive to vote. (NO not bribing : O P ) In the system I propose there would be no need for voting, because there is no CSM.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Looney Toons.	Posted - 2010.01.28 16:03:00 - [104] Granted... but no CSM is worse. We need gamers who are discerning enough to relay problems and ideas to CCP. Making them listen to potentially 50 to 60 thousand pilots is not what I call a smart move. Committee or not... the CSM is nice for that particular problem. However... the individuals who are put in the CSM.... well.. perhaps its time we inflict more qualifications and less grandstanding. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com =========================
Aynen	Posted - 2010.01.28 16:08:00 - [105] Originally by: Drake Draconis Granted... but no CSM is worse. We need gamers who are discerning enough to relay problems and ideas to CCP. Making them listen to potentially 50 to 60 thousand pilots is not what I call a smart move. Committee or not... the CSM is nice for that particular problem. However... the individuals who are put in the CSM.... well.. perhaps its time we inflict more qualifications and less grandstanding. I reckon you'll always run into the corruption problem in any electoral system. You could have CCP hire PhD's in psychology/gamedesign/politics to form a permanent CSM which might reduce the problem, but that's pretty close to what I'm saying, minus the survey tools which I think a permanent CSM made up of educated people would opt for anyway.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Looney Toons.	Posted - 2010.01.28 16:11:00 - [106] I honestly doubt a PhD let alone a bloody psychiatrist is going to know anything about EVE Online to be quite honest. The people who get hired to do the job should be unbiased seasoned eve pilots. Good luck finding that. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com =========================
Aynen	Posted - 2010.01.28 16:14:00 - [107] Originally by: Drake Draconis I honestly doubt a PhD let alone a bloody psychiatrist is going to know anything about EVE Online to be quite honest. The people who get hired to do the job should be unbiased seasoned eve pilots. Good luck finding that. I disagree, the permanent CSM would only be 'relaying the messege'. They're there to figure out what people want, not how to give it to them, that's up to CCP's game designers. I'd imagine the permanent CSM are statisticians, and psychologists who know how to set up surveys and how to analyze them.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Looney Toons.	Posted - 2010.01.28 17:18:00 - [108] Originally by: Aynen Originally by: Drake Draconis I honestly doubt a PhD let alone a bloody psychiatrist is going to know anything about EVE Online to be quite honest. The people who get hired to do the job should be unbiased seasoned eve pilots. Good luck finding that. I disagree, the permanent CSM would only be 'relaying the messege'. They're there to figure out what people want, not how to give it to them, that's up to CCP's game designers. I'd imagine the permanent CSM are statisticians, and psychologists who know how to set up surveys and how to analyze them. Think about what you just said. Who would you rather deliever the message... someone who understands and has done whatever the hell it is your doing? We don't need to be pyschoanalyzed and share our problems while lying on a couch. We need people who play this game on a frequent basis... people who understand the mechanics and day to day struggles in working around the problems and trying to come up with solutions. People who have no agenda and not interested in grandstanding or getting a free trip to fanfest and don't give a crap about us. Getting some PHD or some psycho to listen to us is a total waste of time. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com =========================
Aynen	Posted - 2010.01.28 17:57:00 - [109] Originally by: Drake Draconis Think about what you just said. Who would you rather deliever the message... someone who understands and has done whatever the hell it is your doing? We don't need to be pyschoanalyzed and share our problems while lying on a couch. We need people who play this game on a frequent basis... people who understand the mechanics and day to day struggles in working around the problems and trying to come up with solutions. People who have no agenda and not interested in grandstanding or getting a free trip to fanfest and don't give a crap about us. Getting some PHD or some psycho to listen to us is a total waste of time. The people relaying the messege really have no need for playing experience, the designers who decide what to do with the data however, do. I consider it a mistake that CSM members see themselves as needing to know what fixes player's problems. That's gamedesign, not the task of a representative of the people. A representative needs to know how to listen. And people who have surveys and statistical analysis in their trackrecord of education can do so.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Looney Toons.	Posted - 2010.01.28 19:00:00 - [110] Edited by: Drake Draconis on 28/01/2010 19:00:18 Originally by: Aynen Originally by: Drake Draconis Think about what you just said. Who would you rather deliever the message... someone who understands and has done whatever the hell it is your doing? We don't need to be pyschoanalyzed and share our problems while lying on a couch. We need people who play this game on a frequent basis... people who understand the mechanics and day to day struggles in working around the problems and trying to come up with solutions. People who have no agenda and not interested in grandstanding or getting a free trip to fanfest and don't give a crap about us. Getting some PHD or some psycho to listen to us is a total waste of time. The people relaying the messege really have no need for playing experience, the designers who decide what to do with the data however, do. I consider it a mistake that CSM members see themselves as needing to know what fixes player's problems. That's gamedesign, not the task of a representative of the people. A representative needs to know how to listen. And people who have surveys and statistical analysis in their trackrecord of education can do so. Alright let me attempt to explain what I mean. I work for a computer shop.... I sell PC's... and Mac's. I also fix them... I'm a certified tech... a professional Apple Care technician to boot. Wouldn't you rather talk to the Tech who fixes them.... as far as purchasing a computer... as opposed to some punk sales kid who's more interested in getting a commission check? Who would you trust more? EVE is its own world... its own culture. You try to explain EVE to some average joe who plays WOW and they are going to go glossy eyed. I would expect the same for some random PHD or some such. Bottom line - EVE is like its own langauge... if you don't speak it... know it... fluently... hireing a translator is going to be foolish. I do not want some random Joe to handle the critical process of collecting and coalating data for CCP when it comes to critical matters such as lag.... or skill injections... or super-capital ships. I would rather have someone who knows how to fly that said ship and (dare i say) is intimately familiar with it. Not someone who knows how to read a book and generate stats... hell anyone can do that. Few can play EVE online and know it well enough to relay information. Not even I would fit that job... I'm just starting... and I've been at it for a little over 2 years if not at. Furthermore... my pet peeves with Mazz and Lark (whom I seem to pick on frequently) are there actions... not there experience. If either of them tell me "This ship does this and this way because I've been doing this for this long and that's that" I'm not likely to argue with them. I will argue with them when it comes to there stance on ethics and accountability. So when it boils down to my large sore spot with those 2 its political... not experience in EVE. Bottom line yet again... if we don't get people who are experienced with the daily life of EVE... they have no business representing us let alone dealing with the data they collect. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com =========================
Aynen	Posted - 2010.01.28 19:49:00 - [111] Granted, but the expertese you're after tends to come in a package deal, along with the personal interest such an expert has invested in the game, aswell as that he can't be held very accountable, being that he's just a player, not a payed employee who has his livelihood depending on his ability to keep his job. Also, a lot of experts lack the other skills required to be a representative: they feel they're so keenly aware of the game and what it needs that they stop to listen. With permanent employees who have good credentials, you will lose some of the experience, and gain reliability, which in my view is a good trade. Would ofcourse be nicer to get both, but how do you go about getting that?
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Looney Toons.	Posted - 2010.01.28 20:48:00 - [112] Edited by: Drake Draconis on 28/01/2010 20:50:28 Originally by: Aynen Granted, but the expertese you're after tends to come in a package deal, along with the personal interest such an expert has invested in the game, aswell as that he can't be held very accountable, being that he's just a player, not a payed employee who has his livelihood depending on his ability to keep his job. Also, a lot of experts lack the other skills required to be a representative: they feel they're so keenly aware of the game and what it needs that they stop to listen. With permanent employees who have good credentials, you will lose some of the experience, and gain reliability, which in my view is a good trade. Would ofcourse be nicer to get both, but how do you go about getting that? That's why I said Unbiased Experienced Pilots. But again... I don't know how.... surely someone around here has an idea that would involve keeping what we got... but altering the rules or the process of election to make it fit better. Perhaps you force them to leave there various alliances/corporations much like an ISD volunteer... this would force them to be detached to a degree and would have to do a great deal of work around to get anywhere. And to prevent alt abuse... require a 2 year old pilot age requirement to get elected in the first place. (For those with more than one account... verify via credit card records and such... hell they (CCP) want a passport.. its just gonna be a little obvious if they are frakking around) No one should be allowed to run if they are on an different account. (if that's not a rule already it should be!) This keeps the repeat alternate crap and people who get thrown out from coming back without a great deal of effort and cost to there own. Nothing stops them from doing alliance business... but it would give the impression of neutrality and less on judging them due to there ties to whatever alliance. It may not be perfect... but it would cause alot of frustration on the current status quo and may change it up juuust enough to make it work. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com =========================
Aynen	Posted - 2010.01.28 20:58:00 - [113] Originally by: Drake Draconis That's why I said Unbiased Experienced Pilots. But again... I don't know how.... surely someone around here has an idea that would involve keeping what we got... but altering the rules or the process of election to make it fit better. Perhaps you force them to leave there various alliances/corporations much like an ISD volunteer... this would force them to be detached to a degree and would have to do a great deal of work around to get anywhere. And to prevent alt abuse... require a 2 year old pilot age requirement to get elected in the first place. (For those with more than one account... verify via credit card records and such... hell they (CCP) want a passport.. its just gonna be a little obvious if they are frakking around) No one should be allowed to run if they are on an different account. (if that's not a rule already it should be!) This keeps the repeat alternate crap and people who get thrown out from coming back without a great deal of effort and cost to there own. Nothing stops them from doing alliance business... but it would give the impression of neutrality and less on judging them due to there ties to whatever alliance. It may not be perfect... but it would cause alot of frustration on the current status quo and may change it up juuust enough to make it work. To be honest, I'm rather sceptical of that that would work. Mostly because in order for the people to have faith in the system again, it shouldn't look too much like the CSM we allready know or they'll argue that it hasn't really changed, and they'll still have biass against it. and without good playerbase involvement, it won't work no matter what we do.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Looney Toons.	Posted - 2010.01.28 21:01:00 - [114] Originally by: Aynen Originally by: Drake Draconis That's why I said Unbiased Experienced Pilots. But again... I don't know how.... surely someone around here has an idea that would involve keeping what we got... but altering the rules or the process of election to make it fit better. Perhaps you force them to leave there various alliances/corporations much like an ISD volunteer... this would force them to be detached to a degree and would have to do a great deal of work around to get anywhere. And to prevent alt abuse... require a 2 year old pilot age requirement to get elected in the first place. (For those with more than one account... verify via credit card records and such... hell they (CCP) want a passport.. its just gonna be a little obvious if they are frakking around) No one should be allowed to run if they are on an different account. (if that's not a rule already it should be!) This keeps the repeat alternate crap and people who get thrown out from coming back without a great deal of effort and cost to there own. Nothing stops them from doing alliance business... but it would give the impression of neutrality and less on judging them due to there ties to whatever alliance. It may not be perfect... but it would cause alot of frustration on the current status quo and may change it up juuust enough to make it work. To be honest, I'm rather sceptical of that that would work. Mostly because in order for the people to have faith in the system again, it shouldn't look too much like the CSM we allready know or they'll argue that it hasn't really changed, and they'll still have biass against it. and without good playerbase involvement, it won't work no matter what we do. CSM is hated because of peoples actions... not because of the CSM itself. They just don't know who to blame... so the CSM gets slapped around. So change the behavior of the CSM and get people to try again. Restrict who can run and who cant... make it harder to get in. I would give it an another shot if convinced there was a good shot. But shutting it down would be worse. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com =========================
Aynen	Posted - 2010.01.28 21:20:00 - [115] I don't think the average human being works that way, they'll want to see radical change before scepsis goes away. In the end, even if the change is just cosmetic in nature, I'd still support the main idea of disbanding and reforming the CSM or the idea behind it.
wert668	Posted - 2010.01.29 12:31:00 - [116]
Van Haulen	Posted - 2010.01.29 12:38:00 - [117]
Jarvis Hellstrom The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance	Posted - 2010.01.29 17:08:00 - [118] Clearly something needs to change. One issue that I have when I vote (and I always do) is that getting a real handle on the positions of the candidates is difficult. Some were easy choices, this last one was incredibly hard as I couldn't find a single candidate that I felt would represent anything like the majority of my opinions about things that need work in the game. Since that's the point of the organization, that's an issue. This is the 21st Century. We can fix that, we have the technology. Let's start with some basic ideas. First of all, we want to know what the candidates stand for. This should be readily available information. When someone tosses their hat in the CSM ring they should be required to fill out a form on their views which should then be available as a summary for all candidates in a simple chart. This could be broken up into various sections of the game. For instance: Suicide ganking: 1-10 Where 10 is "Everyone should be doing it" and 1 is "Doing it should get you banned". 5 is "Current Status Quo is fine". Someone then looking at a candidate could then see their stance on suicide ganking and know if they feel it should be made easier, harder or stay the same. These are very very general views, naturally, and reading what the candidate has to say on them would be important. But it at least lets you filter the candidates down to five or six you can really study who are closest to your own views. You could even take the survey yourself (the same survey) and have the system rank the candidates in order from how close their opinion matches yours to how far away they are either on a specific issue or a specific subset of issues (High sec matters etc.) or overall with all topics. Another thing - we have certificates now. Characters running for CSM should temporarily have their certificates made public as part of their campaign. That will give some idea of their ability in-game. Finally things like their sec status and standings should be made public. Yes - this means running for CSM throws a very public spotlight on you. Good. You want the job, you get the limelight for all the good and ill that comes with. These things would, I think, increase voting in the CSM. In fact, perhaps taking the survey and viewing the candidates should be something put up at log-in as part of the game. Yes, those who don't care could simply press "spoil ballot" and get on with the game but it would raise the interest of many players and get them thinking. Each candidate, in addition to their ratings and public stats, could have a short (maybe 1000 words) statement of their main platform and what they wish to help CCP focus on and accomplish. Are these a panacea? No, of course not. But they are tools that would improve, I believe, participation in CSM elections. Right now everyone just says, "Well, there will be goons and some big alliance people and maybe a single token carebear who will get ignored" and don't bother to vote. Perhaps, with better tools and more visibility to the population of New Eden as a whole, we might see better representation. Perhaps even a carebear dominated council? Wouldn't that be an odd thing? I don't want to see any part of EVE ignored. High sec, low sec, and null sec are all integral parts of the game and ALL need more love. As a player, I often joke about loathing pirates - and yet we NEED them in EVE and they need more attention to make their careers better and viable. Without bad guys, who would the good guys fight? Where's the excitement? Every part of the game has areas that need work. What's important is making the voice of the players known to CCP, not just the voice of a few special interest groups with too much ability to emphasize that voice under the current system. There's my .02 ISK on things. May God stand between you and harm in all the Empty places you must walk (Old Egyptian Blessing)
TeaDaze	Posted - 2010.01.29 18:35:00 - [119] Originally by: Jarvis Hellstrom Let's start with some basic ideas. First of all, we want to know what the candidates stand for. This should be readily available information. When someone tosses their hat in the CSM ring they should be required to fill out a form on their views which should then be available as a summary for all candidates in a simple chart. Did you see Vote Match during the last CSM elections? It isn't quite what you suggest but was a pretty good idea. Originally by: Jarvis Hellstrom Another thing - we have certificates now. Characters running for CSM should temporarily have their certificates made public as part of their campaign. That will give some idea of their ability in-game. I wouldn't have a problem with this, but it really only shows their ability to train various skills. E.g. my main has a raft of skills from when I was learning the game that mean nothing (industrial and trade skills that would make me out to be a trading expert when I've only used them a handful of times). Originally by: Jarvis Hellstrom Finally things like their sec status and standings should be made public. They are already public. Open People and Places, search for character, show info, view sec status and standings. It would be easier to have it in one place of course, but somebody could have provided it just as Dierdra Vaal provided vote match. I would like to see some of these things in a future election portal along with the ability to vote in game (via the IGB would be fine) Originally by: Jarvis Hellstrom Each candidate, in addition to their ratings and public stats, could have a short (maybe 1000 words) statement of their main platform and what they wish to help CCP focus on and accomplish. There was a box for this on the candidate list where the campaign statement from the CSM application was put. Some people decided to leave it blank or put in a "lol" type answer. However it was never stated that the box could have HTML formatting (the apps were sent via email) and CCP never updated the text when asked so it became of limited use. Originally by: Jarvis Hellstrom Right now everyone just says, "Well, there will be goons and some big alliance people and maybe a single token carebear who will get ignored" and don't bother to vote. [...] Every part of the game has areas that need work. What's important is making the voice of the players known to CCP, not just the voice of a few special interest groups with too much ability to emphasize that voice under the current system. The bigger alliances have the muscle to get somebody (or in the goons case 2 people) voted in, but that is mostly down to the well organised nature of alliances. Ok, well organised might be a stretch in some cases but the point is they are generally loyal to their own members. Carebears are frequently solo or small corp focussed and as a whole lack the organisational structure to bloc vote even though clearly they could have pushed in a few candidates if they wanted to. Many of us didn't have the benefit of thousands of guaranteed alliance votes (my alliance have about 150 people) so they actually had to campaign. This at least demonstrates a level of commitment even if you don't agree with the platform they run on. As I wanted to be proactive I took advantage of vote match, I did live debates on Split infinity radio (as did 3 other people in the CSM and one of the alternates). I also taught PvP classes with Agony and a guest lecture spot with Eve University. I blogged, tweeted and directly interacted with the voters to answer questions etc. I put in the effort and was lucky to get enough people to support me, which is why I take the responsibility seriously and put in the time to discuss issues (as well as taking on a very time consuming role. The current system does not value the commitment a CSM member is willing to (or does) put in which should probably be looked at...
Jarvis Hellstrom Gallente The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance	Posted - 2010.01.29 23:43:00 - [120] Originally by: TeaDaze Did you see Vote Match during the last CSM elections? It isn't quite what you suggest but was a pretty good idea. I did, but at the time I tried it couldn't get it to work properly. Might have been browser settings, not sure. I thought it a good concept but, since the darned thing wouldn't work for me, lacking in execution. Quote: I wouldn't have a problem with this, but it really only shows their ability to train various skills. E.g. my main has a raft of skills from when I was learning the game that mean nothing (industrial and trade skills that would make me out to be a trading expert when I've only used them a handful of times). I know - I have some I don't use as well. It's good to have something to go on though, and with the closure of ghost training there is less training of skills folks don't plan to use, at least on newer characters. It's not perfect (heck nothing is) but it's more info to go on. Quote: They are already public. Open People and Places, search for character, show info, view sec status and standings. It would be easier to have it in one place of course, but somebody could have provided it just as Dierdra Vaal provided vote match. I know, but wading through it all for thirty candidates, writing it all down etc. - just too finicky for most to bother. (I only checked the 3-4 of the folks I personally considered for my vote - and that means I may have missed something important). Quote: I would like to see some of these things in a future election portal along with the ability to vote in game (via the IGB would be fine) Well, now that the IGB actually works (well, mostly anyway certainly light years better than previously). In the real world governments put out a lot of effort for voting. The system we have works, after a fashion, but there is a lot of room for improvement. Quote: The current system does not value the commitment a CSM member is willing to (or does) put in Completely agree. The hard part is quantifying it in some way that isn't open to folks saying 'The CSM is just making themselves look real good'. I think a record of work put in (in some fashion) number of meetings attended/missed and the person's voting record should be summarized somewhere, again, easily accessible without tons of digging. Voters are, by and large, kind of lazy. That's human nature. I research who I vote for but even I'm lazier than I should be by my own standards. Even so I'm sure I do more than most folks who vote for the person they know, or on party lines etc. It's why incumbents in the real world have such a huge advantage. May God stand between you and harm in all the Empty places you must walk (Old Egyptian Blessing)

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.