Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dierdra Vaal
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 00:39:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Dierdra Vaal on 30/11/2009 00:39:14 Vote Match! overview The Vote Match! website presents the user with a list of statements ("PvP should be optional", "Trade orders should have a 1000 ISK minimum increment", etc), and compares the answers the user gives to the answers given by CSM candidates. Using this comparison the website then calculates a match percentage, neatly identifying and displaying which candidate represents the user's views the best.
I have been collecting data on the website usage, as a tool to improve and verify the questions. This analysis uses the data gathered. I also present a tenative census, showing which candidates were most popular with the website's users.
Overall post election assesment Preparation The preparation that was most important to the website was the gathering of questions. I did this in several threads, on the official Eve Online forums as well as the Scrapheap Challenge forums. As my statistics show that only 5 questions will need to be changed to removed, I think I managed quite well to get a good collection of balanced questions.
I did make one mistake in changing a question shortly before opening the candidate entry phase, which resulted in two questions which more or less covered the same issue. I decided not to change the question when I found out - but I will take greater care checking all questions before opening the candidate entry phase next time.
Candidate response Evemails were sent to all candidates informing them of the website, giving them their log-in information and encouraging them to participate. As the candidate entry phase progressed, a reminder evemail was sent to all candidates who had not yet filled in a profile. Additionally, I made two forum threads (one here and one at the SHC forums) listing the unresponsive candidates to alert them or people who knew them. I also tried starting ingame conversations with the unresponsive candidates. Through these efforts, 38 out of 49 candidates made a profile. Two candidates chose not to participate because they felt the website did not represent their points of view or style of representation. Nine candidates did not respond at all.
Part of the reason will be that at least a portion of the candidates are leaders of large corporations or alliances, which generally tenders their evemail unusable. I hope to get a higher response rate in the next election, when we call all enjoy an evemail client that is actually usable.
User response As this election was the first Vote Match! was active in, I am quite happy with the 3300 unique users (see Vote Match! usage below). It has given good insight in the questions, as well as show that the concept works. I am quite happy to report the feedback I received from both candidates and users was overwhelmingly positive.
However, as we have seen voter numbers between 20000 and 27000 in previous elections, the current response lies far below the expected number of voters. Since one of the goals of Vote Match! is to encourage more people to vote, it is clear that the website needs more exposure in future elections. This may be done through a more active advertisement campaign including login-screen advertisement. Director of Education :: EVE University Chairman of the CSM
|
Dierdra Vaal
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 00:45:00 -
[2]
Vote Match! usage Graph of the 14 day election period
As the graph shows, the first few days the website was open were also the busiest. We reached over a thousand users in the first day. This was as we expected. We maxed out at 3389 unique users and 4614 users including duplicates.
The difference between the unique users and all users is most likely due to people taking the matching test several times out of curiosity, as most of the difference stem from the first few days of the website being open. Additionally, some matches by different people will register as the same user if they use the same IP address. College campuses or office buildings (any shared connection) will generate a difference between 'all users' and 'unique users'.
Vote Match! question analysis The Answer Index (AI) is the average answer on a question. As all answers range from -2 to +2, a perfectly balanced question has an AI of 0.0. Questions where the AI is greater than 1 or smaller than -1 are questions I'll look into removing or changing as they do not get as many different answers as I would like. As stated in the Preparation paragraph, I am also planning to remove one question which accidentally duplicated another issue.
* Only 4 questions are candidates for removal based on the current answers. * 1 Question was perfectly balanced and resulted in an AI of 0.0
Question Importance (QI) is also an interesting stat. As candidates can mark 3 questions as being 'important' to them, a question that no candidate finds important is one I will review for removal or change.
* Only 1 question was not important to anyone * The question that was marked 'important' most often was marked 'important' 9 times
Vote Match! census Before listing the top tens, I want to emphasise that Vote Match! was never intended to be a census tool. As such, I am not posting these lists as a prediction, but rather as way to see how the Vote Match! users correlate with the actual results.
The reasons that the actual results can (and most likely will) differ from these lists is because we have no way of verifying that the Vote Match! users are an accurate cross section of all voters in the election. Additionally, it is quite likely that this website is used more by people who are not sure who to vote for, and used less by people who already decided their vote. An example of this would be pilots in an organisation that direct all their votes to a predetermined candidate for 'block voting'. This behaviour skews my statistics towards candidates that attract more floating voters. The statistics also do not take personal (in-game) reputation into account, which may very well move pilots not to vote for their highest match.
I have generated two candidate rankings based on two different calculations. The first list is based on calculating how many voters have the candidate as their top match. The second list ranks candidates based on the sum of fidelity for them of every voter.
Top Match 1: Z0D 2: Helen Highwater 3: Alpais 4: Basta Ya 5: Jonathan Dawnchaser 6: Daugar Draaken 7: Herschel Yamamoto 8: Kirana 9: Mrs Trzzbk 10: ElvenLord
Total Fidelity 1: Z0D 2: Helen Highwater 3: Alpais 4: Basta Ya 5: ElvenLord 6: Mike Azariah 7: TeaDaze 8: Jonathan Dawnchaser 9: Song Li 10: Darth Sith |
Dierdra Vaal
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 00:50:00 -
[3]
The future of Vote Match! While I quite liked providing this service, I think it would be best if CCP would incorporate a service like this in the CSM section of the website. Since CCP has complete control over the sign up process, they could achieve a 100% candidate response rate. CCP can also reach out to the player base a lot easier than I can which means a lot more pilots would become aware of this website. I did notice that particulary pilots who were not familiar with the candidates appreciated this service, and as such I think that this could be a great tool to get more players involved in the election. CCP did indicate they want to achieve a higher response rate, and giving players a better insight in where the various candidates stand is paramount in this.
As for the website itself, one feature I hope to add for next time is the ability to chart the 'political position' of candidates in two dimensional answer space. It my sound a little abstract but it basically comes down to a chart like this.
I would appreciate feedback to further improve this service :)
Director of Education :: EVE University Chairman of the CSM
|
Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 00:53:00 -
[4]
Thanks for providing this service and I agree that CCP should have a look at this and implement it in some form.
I don't like the dimensional graphs, as EVE is too complex to just pick some polar opposites and place candidates on a scale somewhere between them. I like the question system much better. ---
Click banner for info! |
Serenity Steele
Dynamic Data Distribution
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 00:55:00 -
[5]
Thanks Diedra, great post. Look forward to correlation/evaluation of this versus the key results. Should be particularly interesting in respect to alliance influence on the outcome. I'm sure there will be many lessons to learn for future candidates!
Buy ≡v≡ Strategic Maps in the Eve-Online Store |
Dierdra Vaal
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 00:57:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Thanks for providing this service and I agree that CCP should have a look at this and implement it in some form.
I don't like the dimensional graphs, as EVE is too complex to just pick some polar opposites and place candidates on a scale somewhere between them. I like the question system much better.
I wouldnt remove the question system - the graphing would just be extra :) Director of Education :: EVE University Chairman of the CSM
|
Z0D
Minmatar Rubycom Matrix United Corporations Of Modern Eve
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 01:06:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Z0D on 30/11/2009 01:10:08
I agree that advertising directly on the client's main page at the logon screen would greatly increase visibility and make players aware of important events in far greater numbers.
They could also greatly increase the numbers of voters, if they incorporated voting after your initial logon and before choosing a character to get in the game.
Players could still at that point choose to vote or abstain from it.
Click below for my manifesto.
|
Dierdra Vaal
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 01:34:00 -
[8]
unfortunately I dont have 700mil to spend on a login ad :P Hopefully I do in 6 months. Director of Education :: EVE University Chairman of the CSM
|
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 08:15:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Trimutius III on 30/11/2009 08:18:36
Funny thing... I didn't used it before vote... But I was curious and used it after I voted... Actually best match (73%) was with candidate that i have chosen... Strange thing i should say (especially when considering why I voted for that candidate), but maybe this thing works, or it is just coincidence...
Nice statistics anyway (I just like statistics, any kind of statistics) ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
Extreme
Eye of God Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 12:26:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Extreme on 30/11/2009 12:34:18 (edit: spelling)
Consider to (also) make use of topics/issues handled by former CSM. maybe in a second section.
This second section will help to give a better profile on candidates and their overall knowledge of Eve Online.
And on a (large) sidenote;
Vote match is a nice tool to see who's ideas match you the best.
And with all the campaigns run it's always about "what are your ideas?" people with 'just' good ideas can be the worst CSM's;
The results say nothing about a CSM's qualities;
* Ability to communicate (efficiently)
- some talk too much ( we aleady got the point, can we vote now? / We already discussing in CSM for over 4 hrs, not sure if you have but i do have a real life )
- some write too much/ too detailed (their ideas) ( TLDRI - Too long, didn't read it ) - Being able to see the bigger picture (or the lack off) ( too authistic )
* Are you still (being CSM) triggered to show up every time when the counsil gets together?
- "my topics i ran for candidacy have been discussed, i have no further use for being in CSM" - "i visited Iceland, i had my V.I.P. treatment by CCP, i had my adventure"
Like i said before; when 9 muppets been elected we will get the muppetshow and not a working counsil.
I hope the next run for CSM (vote match)will be less about ideas only and/or will include a section about candidates capabilities. Or just give a 'warning' that "vote match is a tool to match your ideas however it says nothing about the candidates qualities to be able to function properly within the counsil"
/X . .
|
|
Dierdra Vaal
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 15:10:00 -
[11]
if you can come up with an objective metric for a persons capabilities I would love to hear it. I wasn't able to come up with one and I'm not going to resort to a checkbox "Are you a good communicator yes/no".
Additionally, the text on Step 4 reads
Quote: We recommend that you take a detailed look at these candidates, who they are and what they stand for, to decide who gets your vote!
Director of Education :: EVE University Chairman of the CSM
|
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 16:46:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Trimutius III on 30/11/2009 16:47:18 Edited by: Trimutius III on 30/11/2009 16:46:35 Actually psycological test will be to much...
But that question that there are quite good... Though i think there should be more question about trade, i'm personally trader that's is why it's important to me (I most of the time trade in Jita for the last few months)
Question like Renewal of orders To rare reloading Questions about wallet maybe (for example not showing right number of ISK in some situations)
I just didn't thought it was important, but somehow after i used vote match i realised that it's hard for me to understand who is better based on how 0.0 works etc when my style of play differs from most of the players. More questions for peaceful style of play (like mining, industry, science, trade) would be good... Some CSM candidates maybe don't care about it, that's why many peacful industrialists and traders could vote for someone who cares... For example one reason why I have chosen candidate I voted for was mentioning by him of some critical industrial defect in his program... ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
Jared Ulfsuun
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 19:48:00 -
[13]
Having used tools like this in conjunction with "real" elections, there is one extra feature I would wish for: the ability for candidates to write short comments on the reasoning behind their answers.
Tools like this make it easy pick out a few people with mostly compatible views, but picking the best candidate from that pool is much harder.
The reason a candidate agrees or disagrees with my view on any particular issue can be far more important than the issue itself. It allows identification of both false positives and false negatives.
Obligatory Silly Example:
Candidate is in favor of universal health care. Stated reason: "We need universal health-care so that dissenters can be sterilized."
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 20:39:00 -
[14]
Thanks for providing this, please keep it up and improve for next time :D
|
Jonathan Dawnchaser
Caldari School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 22:08:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Jared Ulfsuun Having used tools like this in conjunction with "real" elections, there is one extra feature I would wish for: the ability for candidates to write short comments on the reasoning behind their answers.
This could easily lead to information overload.
Despite that, it would've been nice to be able to justify hard choices. Maybe in addition to "Important Questions" it would be nice if candidates could justify just those questions. It would suddenly add new weight to those questions. _____________ JD for CSM4 |
Jaeden Aquilae
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 22:38:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Jonathan Dawnchaser
Originally by: Jared Ulfsuun Having used tools like this in conjunction with "real" elections, there is one extra feature I would wish for: the ability for candidates to write short comments on the reasoning behind their answers.
This could easily lead to information overload.
Despite that, it would've been nice to be able to justify hard choices. Maybe in addition to "Important Questions" it would be nice if candidates could justify just those questions. It would suddenly add new weight to those questions.
Interesting to see you say this. Although you came up as my highest percentage match, iirc I actually chose not to vote for you because you had no website and had little to no further information that I could base a final decision on.
|
Jonathan Dawnchaser
Caldari School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 23:21:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Jonathan Dawnchaser on 30/11/2009 23:21:30
Originally by: Jaeden Aquilae
Originally by: Jonathan Dawnchaser
Originally by: Jared Ulfsuun Having used tools like this in conjunction with "real" elections, there is one extra feature I would wish for: the ability for candidates to write short comments on the reasoning behind their answers.
This could easily lead to information overload.
Despite that, it would've been nice to be able to justify hard choices. Maybe in addition to "Important Questions" it would be nice if candidates could justify just those questions. It would suddenly add new weight to those questions.
Interesting to see you say this. Although you came up as my highest percentage match, iirc I actually chose not to vote for you because you had no website and had little to no further information that I could base a final decision on.
I submitted before creating a JPSC thread (which was my mistake). By the time I had the thread (and its URL) I couldn't change the listing in the candidate page. So I did the best I could to advertise the url for that thread in my bio (in game) and my signature here.
But I am sure whoever you ended up voting for convinced you to vote for them. Which is the whole point of an election.
However, this isn't the place for this conversation. _____________ JD for CSM4 |
Jonathan Dawnchaser
Caldari School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 23:57:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Dierdra Vaal unfortunately I dont have 700mil to spend on a login ad :P Hopefully I do in 6 months.
You could charge future CSM candidates to participate. You could probably even make a profit.
(38 Candidates) * (50 million isk/Candidate) = 1.9 billion isk. Or you could do half that and still get past the 700 million mark. _____________ JD for CSM4 |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2009.12.01 15:22:00 -
[19]
Had more than a few people mail me that i was their top match or close, surprised i didnt make the list. Just goes to show how popular the site became i guess!
All in all, I'd call it a much needed win for the whole election process. ---
Zombie Apocalypse Guitar-Wielding Superteam |
Crownsith
Minmatar Potentium Force
|
Posted - 2009.12.01 16:55:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Extreme Edited by: Extreme on 30/11/2009 12:54:38
I hope the next run for CSM (vote match)will be less about ideas only and/or will include a section about candidates capabilities. Or just give a 'warning' that "vote match is a tool to match your ideas however it says nothing about the candidates qualities to be able to function properly within the counsil"
* or maybe CCP/ Xhagen should campaign more about what is being expected from CSM candidates and what candidates can expect. (a summery of my post for example)
/X
I completely agree with you, and have been trying to point this out during the last two campaigns.
Here are some of my thoughts on the possible future of CSM:
I think Dierdra did a great job with the Vote Match, but mainly because it is a step in the right direction. The focus is too much on the issues and not enough on personality and social skills. I believe that those skills are a true key to the successful interaction between Players- CSM - CCP. That is another reason why I also believe that CSM candidates should be allowed to take longer terms or more terms "in office". We should try to develop a sort of "CSM candidate standard" based on player and CCP feedback, and in time a group of "professional CSM officials" will emerge.
I believe once such a system will be firmly established a natural split between left and right, liberal and conservative views will occur. So when it comes to elections players will choose the most qualified candidates, based on skills, and they will choose their issues based on candidate's left or right views. Of course in the world like EVE purely left or right views are rare, as most candidates will want big changes in some areas (liberal) and stability in other areas (conservative). Ultimately such devisions are not meant to artificially separate the candidates into parties but are rather aimed at focusing the development (legislative) process in one area. Its seems that CCP has used specific player input on several occasions, relating to improvements or fixes on existing game mechanics. On the other hand, when it comes to bigger expansions they generally prefer that players do not go too deep into game design, as to leave their DEVs room to move. From that perspective creating a kind player political system would allow CCP to better gauge the majority vote of the players and it will give the players a stronger influence over CCP's priority list. Often the big questions boil down to this: Do we focus more on improving the existing or on expanding the new?
|
|
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2009.12.01 18:05:00 -
[21]
Interesting reading and many thanks to Dierdra for putting in the effort (IMO more effort than some of the candidates seemed to put into their public campaigns, though I guess if you have a large alliance behind you you don't need to scrabble around for votes like the rest of us )
I can pretty much pinpoint where I "screwed up" on the questions and lowered my match scores. I should have just answered a couple of the questions that I didn't have a strong opinion of just to get a better match, though it wouldn't actually have reflected my position any better
Anyway, I feel it was a useful tool and hope it gets taken forward and developed for the CSM 5 campaign
Vote TeaDaze for CSM #4
|
Dierdra Vaal
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2009.12.01 19:47:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Crownsith The focus is too much on the issues and not enough on personality and social skills.
I dont disagree that is extremely important that a CSM member is driven, willing to put in the time and able to make proper proposals and work diplomatically with the council and CCP. However, as I said before, you cannot measure any of this.
This website isnt about being the only tool for a user to decide who to vote for. It is simply a way to cut down the huge group of candidates into a smaller group of candidates that match your vision for Eve. Which of those candidates you choose is up to you, this is clearly advertised on the website as it encourages people to look into their shortlist in detail!
So yeah, this focuses on issues and not vague notions of social skills and executive abilities because a candidates position on issues can be measured. Do not try and make this website into something it isnt. Director of Education :: EVE University Chairman of the CSM
|
Crownsith
Minmatar Potentium Force
|
Posted - 2009.12.02 11:56:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Crownsith on 02/12/2009 12:05:32
Originally by: Dierdra Vaal
Originally by: Crownsith The focus is too much on the issues and not enough on personality and social skills.
I dont disagree that is extremely important that a CSM member is driven, willing to put in the time and able to make proper proposals and work diplomatically with the council and CCP. However, as I said before, you cannot measure any of this.
This website isnt about being the only tool for a user to decide who to vote for. It is simply a way to cut down the huge group of candidates into a smaller group of candidates that match your vision for Eve. Which of those candidates you choose is up to you, this is clearly advertised on the website as it encourages people to look into their shortlist in detail!
So yeah, this focuses on issues and not vague notions of social skills and executive abilities because a candidates position on issues can be measured. Do not try and make this website into something it isnt.
Asolutely, this site is a great tool, helping the voters to sift through the candidates. I am merely pointing out that your effort to create such a tool should encourage other such efforts aimed at improving the whole process. My hat is off to you sir.
However one could also argue that even though sorting candidates by issues is more logical and straight forward, focusing only on that aspect actually obscures the real purpose of the CSM which is to influence CCP's decisions. Correct me if I am wrong here, ( I am really guessing here, based on observations alone) but it seems that simply heaving strong opinion, on any number of issues, does not automatically win CCP's attention. I suspect that the more coherent CSM is as a group the greater the chance of their success with CCP. Therefore, ability to see the big picture, and all those negotiations skills are crucial at every stage of this process. Of course so far CSM in my opinion has been surprisingly effective, but I imagine, that their voice will get much stronger if more people vote, and we have more skilled candidates.
I sincerely hope that the pre-election evaluation process, to which you have contributed greatly, will expand in the future to include those "vague" skills as well. In my experience, defining the "vague stuff" is as important if not more important, because in the end it leads to much greater transparency. The more clarity the whole CSM concept has the more voters and so on...
My comment was not intended as a criticism of any kind, I am simply trying to contribute, based on my understanding.
|
T'Amber
ships of eve
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 04:06:00 -
[24]
Definately more work put into this than most candidates campaigns :) Good work Deirdra Vaal!
Some improvements I would suggest:
A) Add more questions and issues covering other topics not already included to cover agendas not represented with your current topics
B) Add the ability for candidates to assign points to general topics to represent the candidates priorities and display in a bar graph. Possibly with a dialog box under each topic with a maximum character amount.
C) Be able to log in with the new browser and automatically retreive basic character info (I'm sure you have this planned already)
D) Gather some basic details from users of the website for post election statistics (How long they have played, are they in an alliance, what their professions ingame are etc.)
Although I couldn't use your website as it didn't represent my agenda I appreciate the effort you have put in and can't wait to see what you come up with next time!
-T'amber
Click to Support!
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |