| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
|
CCP Diagoras
C C P Alliance
   |
Posted - 2010.05.20 11:45:00 -
[1]
Hi,
As I mentioned here, we will not be releasing the list of who won the election until the 26th. This is so that we do not interfere with the currently sitting CSM, as the elections were called early for the purpose of sorting travel arrangements for the first CSM-CCP summit of CSM5.
I can however provide some stats. I'll add a little to this later on today:
- 39,433 votes were cast, compared to 21,787 for CSM4
- Of these votes, 754 voters abstained and 38,679 were for candidates
- The turnout for the election was 12.67%
_______________
CCP Diagoras
Research and Statistics |
|
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 12:02:00 -
[2]
That is a large increase in voter turnout!
It will be interesting to see how far that changes the cutoff point for getting elected...
TeaDaze.net |
Virtuozzo
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 12:52:00 -
[3]
It has been an interesting ride indeed, much more active involvements (as opposed to just campaign statements), much more debate, and quite a bit more exposure.
Stakeholder element does up the ante here, it redefines the stage, just beware that can cut in more then one direction 
≡v≡
|
Extreme
Eye of God
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 13:11:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Extreme on 20/05/2010 13:12:08
It is just an epic failure that the first days of voting there was displayed a static list of candidates.
We filed the importance of the problem about the advantage that one have that is listed on top of that list and yet the change wasn't made in time.
Personally i won't jump on the bandwagon concerning Ankh, i have no problem with her and she was ok to work with while i was in CSM-2.
But i'll tell you that Ankh will have 2500 extra votes due to this epic failure of a static list of candidates.
/X
.
.
|
Mynxee
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 13:41:00 -
[5]
It's great to see nearly twice the number of votes cast this time compared to last. I'm sure a little controversy, more active involvement of the community, stakeholder status going forward, CCP's increased communications all helped. Plus CSM4's and Teadaze's excellent efforts to keep us informed of their work contributed to the overall credibility of CSM...that surely contributed to voter turnout.
Thanks for sharing these numbers early.
Life In Low Sec |
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 14:26:00 -
[6]
Was a nice run this once, tiresome, but nice.
Lots of known names running...
Good luck to everyone
Vote for Meissa Anunthiel for CSM 5! Balanced candite, well versed in all aspects of Eve.
http://www.rooksandkings.com/meissa |
Dierdra Vaal
Caldari
Eve University
Ivy League
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 14:26:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Dierdra Vaal on 20/05/2010 14:28:07
I think the frequent login screen ads about the CSM also greatly added to the voter turn out - good to see the number's finally rising :)
btw this thread needs more blue graphs
Director of Education :: EVE University
CSM1 delegate and CSM3 chairman
|
Cinori Aluben
Minmatar
Gladiators of Rage
Opticon Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 15:11:00 -
[8]
Indeed, that's a 65% increase in turnout over the average of all previous elections! It will definitely be interesting to see the cutoff numbers this round, especially seeing as MM is doing their split tactical voting... Vuk Lau could have garned two spots just for himself in each past election he participated in, so he took advantage of that by adding a running-mate; will bump someone else down.
While I was running, I put together a quick spreadsheet of the previous data based on CCP Diagoras' devblogs past, and did a projection of CSM5 based solely on an average of past numbers. I've adjusted up 65% to match the total actual votes this round. It's obviously going to be different if the tactical bloc voting does happen, but it gets the brain going nontheless. If you're interested, here's a URL link to a jpeg of the statistics:
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/8121/projectedcsm5.jpg
Good Luck to you all, it's been a fun (and tiring) race!
---
Cinori Aluben -- CSM 2010!!
"Fix the Little Things First!"
http://www.littlethingsfirst.com |
T'Amber
www.shipsofeve.com
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 15:17:00 -
[9]
 Originally by: Cinori Aluben
Indeed, that's a 65% increase in turnout over the average of all previous elections! It will definitely be interesting to see the cutoff numbers this round, especially seeing as MM is doing their split tactical voting... Vuk Lau could have garned two spots just for himself in each past election he participated in, so he took advantage of that by adding a running-mate; will bump someone else down.
While I was running, I put together a quick spreadsheet of the previous data based on CCP Diagoras' devblogs past, and did a projection of CSM5 based solely on an average of past numbers. I've adjusted up 65% to match the total actual votes this round. It's obviously going to be different if the tactical bloc voting does happen, but it gets the brain going nontheless. If you're interested, here's a URL link to a jpeg of the statistics:
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/8121/projectedcsm5.jpg
Nice blue lines 
I too had estimated 1,300 as the cut off, but with less maths involved in my calculations.
On another not, I'd like to think it was the calibre of candidates that raised the voting percentage, but its more likely all the trolling in this forum topic was the cause.
Good luck to all, but I hope theres atleast some drahma and not just a show of block voting force and karmic balancing.
-T'amber
POLITICS:SIMULATORÖ
|
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 15:18:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Dierdra Vaal
btw this thread needs more blue graphs
Quick and Dirty
TeaDaze.net |
|
CCP Diagoras
C C P Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 15:25:00 -
[11]
Thanks for that, TeaDaze!
Impressive work, Cinori Aluben. I'll give out the following stats regarding the positions, just for you!
Delegates (votes):
1) 4116 (Chair)
2) 3360
3) 2521
4) 2196
5) 1649
6) 1553
7) 1519
8) 1463
9) 1260
Alternates (votes):
10) 1180
11) 1173
12) 1172
13) 1104
14) 1006
_______________
CCP Diagoras
Research and Statistics |
|
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 15:29:00 -
[12]
the seats for alternate are very expensive this year it seems
Vote for Meissa Anunthiel for CSM 5! Balanced candite, well versed in all aspects of Eve.
http://www.rooksandkings.com/meissa |
Centurax
Caldari
Eve Engineering
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 15:54:00 -
[13]
It has been interesting and a lot of fun and may I add my congratulations to those who won and good luck with your work sitting on the CSM.
Somehow I don't think I made it to that list, would be nice to put some names to those numbers. When do those lucky few get to know if they won a seat, or is that all on the 26th, going to be a long wait if it is  .
|
Cinori Aluben
Minmatar
Gladiators of Rage
Opticon Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 16:04:00 -
[14]
Originally by: CCP Diagoras
Thanks for that, TeaDaze!
Impressive work, Cinori Aluben. I'll give out the following stats regarding the positions, just for you!
Delegates (votes):
**#s**
Awesome thanks for the extra information. An updated table with new numbers added, including a trendline, with comparison to my projected:
http://img541.imageshack.us/img541/1208/csm5vsprojected.jpg
The subtotals were more exponential than I thought they may be after tactical bloc voting was considered. But the alternates were all extremely close. Interesting that the % of wasted votes was slightly more than the average I predicted, probably mostly due to the large number of candidates. And I mean, if someone got 900 votes, that's still a dang lot, and they get nothing... Pretty intense. This could be something that CCP addresses in the future; Miyamoto Isoruku wrote a good editorial on the issue here: http://www.eve-tribune.com/index.php?no=5_20&page=7
Thanks again Diagoras for those numbers, although they just make me bite my fingers a bit more... 
---
Cinori Aluben -- CSM 2010!!
"Fix the Little Things First!"
http://www.littlethingsfirst.com |
Cat o'Ninetails
Caldari
Rancer Defence League
Elysium Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 16:06:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Cat o''Ninetails on 20/05/2010 16:06:51
alright so who else got the email?? lol
x
My Facebook! |
Finnroth
The Guardian Agency
Initiative Mercenaries
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 16:15:00 -
[16]
Very impressive rise in the turnout, but if i am not completly misstaken or understanding something wrong, that equals about 311k accounts. Haven't we been at 350k by the time of Apocrypha? Or was that just the number including trials accounts?
|
T'Amber
www.shipsofeve.com
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 17:48:00 -
[17]
Edited by: T''Amber on 20/05/2010 17:51:17
Originally by: CCP Diagoras
said some stuff.
TEASE!
-T'amber
SHIPS OF EVE FIVE
|
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia
Dystopia Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 17:53:00 -
[18]
Damn, that is a lot of votes. So long cautious optimism o/
---
Vote me for CSM.
Low-sec? I got that. Delayed local? You know I got that. Industry love? Oh baby I'm gonna blow.
|
|
CCP Diagoras
C C P Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 18:49:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Finnroth
Very impressive rise in the turnout, but if i am not completly misstaken or understanding something wrong, that equals about 311k accounts. Haven't we been at 350k by the time of Apocrypha? Or was that just the number including trials accounts?
Accounts eligible to vote were active paying, non-CCP/volunteer accounts older than 30 days. This number totalled 311,193.
_______________
CCP Diagoras
Research and Statistics |
|
T'Amber
www.shipsofeve.com
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 18:50:00 -
[20]
Originally by: T'Amber
Edited by: T''Amber on 20/05/2010 18:06:42
Originally by: CCP Diagoras
said some stuff.
TEASE!
-T'amber
Lols nvm.
-T'amber
SHIPS OF EVE FIVE
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 18:55:00 -
[21]
I may have failed.
VOTE SOKRATESZ for an unforgiving, unique and exciting EVE! |
Halo
Northern Intelligence
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 21:01:00 -
[22]
You did miss out this stat:
* 271,690 couldn't give a ****.
|
Tribalist
Saints Amongst Sinners
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 21:25:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Halo
You did miss out this stat:
* 271,690 couldn't give a ****.
What we need is "Chicago Politics" i.e. The ability buy proxies and vote the dead...
Imagine that election... 125% voter turnout! 
Tribe
(Towel SupplicantÖ) |
Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Initiative Mercenaries
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 21:46:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Tribalist
What we need is "Chicago Politics" i.e. The ability buy proxies and vote the dead...
The Chicago motto is: vote early and often.
|
Korvin
Gallente
Shadow Kingdom
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 00:19:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Korvin on 21/05/2010 00:19:12
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yczKwVErQQ
|
T'Amber
www.shipsofeve.com
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 02:47:00 -
[26]
And the CPP said unto the playerbase, "Why do you cry to Me? Tell the children of the Eve Gate to go forward."
"lift up high your rage, and stretch out your hand over the sea of tears and divide it. And the children of eden shall go on dry ground through the midst of the sea of tears."
And this is how it happened.
Then Karma stretched out her hand over the sea of tears; and the CCP caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind smelling slightly of sulphurish ash all thought the night , and made of the sea of tears into a dry land, and the peoples were divided.
SHIPS OF EVE FIVE
|
Dillon Arklight
Universal Army
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 08:30:00 -
[27]
It's great to see a much higher turnout than the previous CSM, lets hope that the high level of interest in the CSM's work continues through its lifetime.
I'd just like to say best of luck to all the players who put their hat in the ring for this election. I can't imagine it must have been easy to come under such scrutiny from your fellow players and if your elected or not you can be proud of your contribution to the game.
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 09:03:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Dillon Arklight
It's great to see a much higher turnout than the previous CSM, lets hope that the high level of interest in the CSM's work continues through its lifetime.
I'd just like to say best of luck to all the players who put their hat in the ring for this election. I can't imagine it must have been easy to come under such scrutiny from your fellow players and if your elected or not you can be proud of your contribution to the game.
Well there's two things that increased turnout in these elections:
1) Openness from CCP. CSM4 + CCP did a great job of making the process more transparent and the achievements more visible which has interested more people than before.
2) Old candidates being able to run again has caused for ferocious campaigning, hate, slander, and much other hilarity which again increased the 'media coverage' of the event and thereby the amount of people that voted.
What needs to be done now is that CSM5 and CCP continue to provide a detailed account of the process and what it leads to. There will always be bitter vets who simply think that the CSM is useless, but much can be gained among the rest of the playerbase.
VOTE SOKRATESZ for an unforgiving, unique and exciting EVE! |
Dillon Arklight
Universal Army
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 11:15:00 -
[29]
A quick thought about the increased voting turnout.
I was wondering how many players with multiple accounts only voted with one of them.
Personally i have multiple accounts but i don't like the idea of casting more than one vote as it dosen't seem democratic. I know its probbaly impossible to tell how many people voted more than once but its something to consider when looking at the voting statistics.
|
Mynxee
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 12:38:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Mynxee on 21/05/2010 12:40:01
Originally by: Dillon Arklight
Personally i have multiple accounts but i don't like the idea of casting more than one vote as it dosen't seem democratic. I know its probbaly impossible to tell how many people voted more than once but its something to consider when looking at the voting statistics.
I think almost everyone with >1 account votes with each of them. You can see that by the comments of support throughout various candidates' threads. Since there's no practical way of limiting votes by individual persons, doing it by authenticated (via login) account is the only realistic option. It doesn't make any sense not to cast all your allowed votes due to philosophical reasons. Everyone else will be giving full support to their preferred candidates; you might as well do so, too -- next time around :).
I miss your podcast 
Life In Low Sec |
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 13:34:00 -
[31]
I know a number of people with multiple accounts who split their votes between candidates they liked.
Of course there is a chance that splitting votes too much means none of your voted for candidates gets in, but that is the risk you take.
TeaDaze.net |
|
CCP Diagoras
C C P Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 14:02:00 -
[32]
Updated first post with:
Some wonderful graphs of times that votes were cast, first votes per day:
And votes per hour of the day:
_______________
CCP Diagoras
Research and Statistics |
|
Dragon Greg
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 14:55:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Dragon Greg on 21/05/2010 15:01:28
Interesting, that really shines and interesting light on those first 3 days of mass trade hub spamming with direct links to vote for Ankh, and the static order of the list with her on top? Would be neat to find out if there is a relation there in the numbers.
Also: you broke the forum layout
|
Korvin
Gallente
Shadow Kingdom
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 15:02:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Korvin on 21/05/2010 15:03:30
Originally by: Dragon Greg
Edited by: Dragon Greg on 21/05/2010 15:01:28
Interesting, that really shines and interesting light on those first 3 days of mass trade hub spamming with direct links to vote for Ankh, and the static order of the list with her on top? Would be neat to find out if there is a relation there in the numbers.
Also: you broke the forum layout
That 3 days was also before the weekend.
|
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 15:51:00 -
[35]
Originally by: CCP Diagoras
<snip>
At last we get the official blue graphs!
Excellent, though now I have to find something else to joke about 
TeaDaze.net |
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 17:17:00 -
[36]
Another potential interesting graph to make?
Where the voters cast their vote (or where their clone is set to). 3 characters per account, but I guess you can go with the character that has the most SP.
Maybe post the difference between the votes of the candidates who got in vs the candidates who didn't as well. See if the claim that "it's only 0.0 people who are interested in the CSM is valid".
Age of characters who abstained vs age of people who voted for someone would be interesting as well (to see if abstains are all "bitter vets")
As far as the previous graphs go, the first 3 days don't correspond to "spamming in local", I think, I believe they correspond to the "natural voter base" of people. People who knew before the elections started who they'd vote for, while the rest of the days are people who got convinced to vote for this candidate or that one.
|
Ashina Sito
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 17:45:00 -
[37]
Originally by: CCP Diagoras
Updated first post with:
Some wonderful graphs of times that votes were cast, first votes per day:
Very interesting. This was something I wanted to see.
I was not expecting to see such a large number of voters at the last minute.... and as I typed this I realized how dumb of an assumption that was. Human beings always wait till the last minute for everything. Still the number is significant.
My interest is that it might be worth it to reduce the election time, or not. Guess it does not matter much ether way.
Thanks for the graphs.
My CSM Election Announcement
|
Dariah Stardweller
Gallente
Gung-Ho
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 18:54:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Dariah Stardweller on 21/05/2010 18:55:01
Originally by: TeaDaze
I know a number of people with multiple accounts who split their votes between candidates they liked.
Lot's of ppl seem to do that, considered it myself for a long time too.
Edit: oh, and yay \o/ on the increasing voter numbers.
|
Musical Fist
Gallente
The Unknown Bar and Pub
Elysium Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 20:12:00 -
[39]
Cat wins and Ankh loses or I will erupt another volcano, just saying
|
Karma
Vortex Incorporated
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 20:16:00 -
[40]
Originally by: T'Amber
And the CPP said unto the playerbase, "Why do you cry to Me? Tell the children of the Eve Gate to go forward."
"lift up high your rage, and stretch out your hand over the sea of tears and divide it. And the children of eden shall go on dry ground through the midst of the sea of tears."
And this is how it happened.
Then Karma stretched out her hand over the sea of tears; and the CCP caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind smelling slightly of sulphurish ash all thought the night , and made of the sea of tears into a dry land, and the peoples were divided.
I'm not a 'her'.
otherwise it is correct.
|
Trimutius III
Legio Octae
Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 20:51:00 -
[41]
1260 for 9-th place... That a pretty competition... But i really hope that i haven't wasted my 4 votes (i have 4 accounts) and candidate for whom i voted will be in CSM for 2nd time, especially considering really big help to Russian community from him and his past achievements... (Guess who i voted for. Though it's pretty obvious and not hard to find out even if it isn't obvious)
And about blue graphs. It is interesting that number of whats during DT is pretty higher then just befor DT and just after DT
-------------------------------------------------
I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
Konoch
Caldari
Northstar Cabal
OWN Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 23:03:00 -
[42]
T'amber from a personal standpoint concerning your lottery i'm disappointed but also because your one of the better people in eve and you'd do a heck of a job as a primary. For whatever reason if your vote counter on that website is accurate your not even an alternate this time around. I can only assume powerblock voting is involved and i'm truly sorry to see that happen.
The CSM is inherently flawed by the overwhelming influence of mega alliances and powerblocks. Unless CCP is willing do something to address this, more and more its going to become very clear that its a joke to even vote. While there was a spike in voting i believe that this was forced by the NC and SC conflict as people in both groups try to get their people on the council with the potential of affecting the war. I am sorry to see that my vote is inherently wasted.
|
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 23:25:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Konoch
The CSM is inherently flawed by the overwhelming influence of mega alliances and powerblocks. Unless CCP is willing do something to address this, more and more its going to become very clear that its a joke to even vote. While there was a spike in voting i believe that this was forced by the NC and SC conflict as people in both groups try to get their people on the council with the potential of affecting the war. I am sorry to see that my vote is inherently wasted.
Considering the actual results haven't been released I wouldn't cry mega alliance blob foul just yet.
In CSM4 only around 4 of the 9 delegates (or 6 of the 14 if you include the alternates) were from large alliances...
TeaDaze.net |
Konoch
Caldari
Northstar Cabal
OWN Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 23:29:00 -
[44]
Originally by: TeaDaze
Originally by: Konoch
The CSM is inherently flawed by the overwhelming influence of mega alliances and powerblocks. Unless CCP is willing do something to address this, more and more its going to become very clear that its a joke to even vote. While there was a spike in voting i believe that this was forced by the NC and SC conflict as people in both groups try to get their people on the council with the potential of affecting the war. I am sorry to see that my vote is inherently wasted.
Considering the actual results haven't been released I wouldn't cry mega alliance blob foul just yet.
In CSM4 only around 4 of the 9 delegates (or 6 of the 14 if you include the alternates) were from large alliances...
There wasnt a full scale war on then like there is right now. Increases the likely hood and the voterspike for me is cause for concern not joy.
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
Monks of War.
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 00:00:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Dillon Arklight
A quick thought about the increased voting turnout.
I was wondering how many players with multiple accounts only voted with one of them.
Personally i have multiple accounts but i don't like the idea of casting more than one vote as it dosen't seem democratic. I know its probbaly impossible to tell how many people voted more than once but its something to consider when looking at the voting statistics.
You're talking as if democracy in its modern form is something good 
It's pretty fine you can affect the game in the same proportion you're already supporting it via your subs. Also considering that less than 20% actually voted, we can safely state that these elections resemble true democracy of the past in a significantly better way, than stupid one man = one vote mass elections. Only the most worthy (and those who actually care) are taking part, that's a good thing.
Don't be a fool.
---[center]
Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist |
cBOLTSON
Caldari
Shadow Legion.
Talos Coalition
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 00:17:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Dillon Arklight
A quick thought about the increased voting turnout.
I was wondering how many players with multiple accounts only voted with one of them.
Personally i have multiple accounts but i don't like the idea of casting more than one vote as it dosen't seem democratic. I know its probbaly impossible to tell how many people voted more than once but its something to consider when looking at the voting statistics.
I can honestly say that I voted with only one account, (I have two), however I had no real idea about the candidates and went purely of what they wrote in that little 'blurb' thingy next to each of the characters pictures in the voting page.
HINT- people that wrote nothing or very little didnt exactly command any respect... o_0
|
William Mill3r
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 00:54:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Mynxee
I miss your podcast
I voted for you, mostly because there was a voice behind the words, but I liked your background and ideas too, took me one hour to go throught all the list...you were quite down near the end if I remember. I hope you got it I would feel like I bet on the right horse
|
Geana Tem
Gallente
The Order of Symbolic Measures
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 01:34:00 -
[48]
Mynxee won my vote by the sound of her voice alone... and her thoughts on UI Issues - but mostly her voice. 
Must be some Sansha mind trick going on because now I'm her willing slave...
Go Mynx-ee! Go Mynx-ee! :: geeky cheerleader-esq bop ::
|
Verran Skarne
Shadowfire Enterprises
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 01:36:00 -
[49]
The voter numbers are very interesting.
I have been playing since before the inception of the CSM, but this is the first CSM election I have voted in. This was primarily because in the past I have felt like CSM discussions focused very heavily on affairs in 0.0 space and factional warfare - and while I feel that those are important parts of the game, they're not parts of the game that I'm active in right now.
I was nearly one of the abstaining masses this time too, but the increased campaigning, along with the article in Massively, actually got me to look at some of the issues the candidates were bringing up. Based on that I decided that I should vote. I will say that it was a difficult choice, and that I only voted with one of my three accounts, because I didn't feel quite right getting 3x the votes that someone else might get. I'm still just one player. That's just a personal thing though.
Anyway, looking forward to seeing the winners next week, and to seeing what the new CSM can accomplish this time. |
KentV
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 03:20:00 -
[50]
I'd be kind of curious to see where the votes came from such as how many accounts in Britain, US, Russia, Germany, etc. voted. Also did they vote mostly for folks from their own nations, or was it spread around pretty well. I just dig demographic data like that. I would also be curious what the fictional demographics were in that how many came from Caldari, Minmatar, Amarr, and Gallente. It would be kind of funny if the Gallente had the worst turnout, considering they are the only "democratic" empire. It would also be fun to see what fictional races got the most same race support.
Technically shouldn't Tibus Heth win in a landslide of Caldari voters everytime. Tibus Heth on the CSM might be pretty interesting.
|
Dlardrageth
ANZAC ALLIANCE
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 04:52:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Konoch
Originally by: TeaDaze
Originally by: Konoch
The CSM is inherently flawed by the overwhelming influence of mega alliances and powerblocks. Unless CCP is willing do something to address this, more and more its going to become very clear that its a joke to even vote. While there was a spike in voting i believe that this was forced by the NC and SC conflict as people in both groups try to get their people on the council with the potential of affecting the war. I am sorry to see that my vote is inherently wasted.
Considering the actual results haven't been released I wouldn't cry mega alliance blob foul just yet.
In CSM4 only around 4 of the 9 delegates (or 6 of the 14 if you include the alternates) were from large alliances...
There wasnt a full scale war on then like there is right now. Increases the likely hood and the voterspike for me is cause for concern not joy.
Confirming that all the "mega alliances" members did/do have nothing else worry about. I mean, hey, we all know the CSM seats are most vital to 0.0 gameplay and outcome of nullsec wars and stuff, right? Who cares about being able to get a decent fight when you can vote instead?
|
Konoch
Caldari
Northstar Cabal
OWN Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 05:51:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Dlardrageth
Originally by: Konoch
Originally by: TeaDaze
Originally by: Konoch
The CSM is inherently flawed by the overwhelming influence of mega alliances and powerblocks. Unless CCP is willing do something to address this, more and more its going to become very clear that its a joke to even vote. While there was a spike in voting i believe that this was forced by the NC and SC conflict as people in both groups try to get their people on the council with the potential of affecting the war. I am sorry to see that my vote is inherently wasted.
Considering the actual results haven't been released I wouldn't cry mega alliance blob foul just yet.
In CSM4 only around 4 of the 9 delegates (or 6 of the 14 if you include the alternates) were from large alliances...
There wasnt a full scale war on then like there is right now. Increases the likely hood and the voterspike for me is cause for concern not joy.
Confirming that all the "mega alliances" members did/do have nothing else worry about. I mean, hey, we all know the CSM seats are most vital to 0.0 gameplay and outcome of nullsec wars and stuff, right? Who cares about being able to get a decent fight when you can vote instead?
Its called taking any advantage you can get a hold of. Please do not try to act as you people have the high ground. Anyone who keeps any kind of tabs on what's going on knows the score and knows how bad it is right now. The influence you could exercise on the game through the CSM to trip the odds in your favor makes it far more likely in these times that alliance leadership would move to have its members vote for their candidate. I wont believe otherwise till i see names. But this spike in the votes and the heavy zero sec outlook in the past and its effects leads me to believe that's exactly what happened.
Anyone in the war knows the score. I don't need to re-hash that out here. While i hate it. To be honest you guys would be foolish not to i suppose. But i cant end without saying this when it comes to fights. Don't talk about a decent fight when Molle himself orders one of the craziest logoffskis ever.
|
Dlardrageth
ANZAC ALLIANCE
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 06:42:00 -
[53]
Okay, for the sake of the argument then... You adressed "mega alliances". Assuming you picked your phrase carefully there, that makes all alliances with "mega" member numbers, aka in excess of 1K members viable. With regards to your point of "block voting"/"taking over CSM" or however you do want to call it.
By current in-game listing there are over 30 of those. Compared to the number of available CSM seats and the posted votes required to get a CSM seat / alternate spot that would logically imply, that if your assumption were right, all, or maybe all but one seat on the CSM would go to those alliances. History of recent CSM panels does not really support this, but well, maybe this time it all changed?
So if you were correct, we'd see on the next CSM panel (almost) exclusively members of those "mega alliances", IF your assumption were right that those were trying to "take over" the CSM. More so, as we cannot be sure that someone external might "accidentally" vote for one of the candidates from those alliances (Gods beware!), as they might raise some valid point in their campaign. Going by sheer numbers under the assumption you are right (and myself wrong about lots of 0.0 not caring a whit about CSM), we'll see come next week a (almost) full 0.0 alliance-stocked CSM, right?
Would be utterly surprised if that would happen, I'd actually still be surprised if only half the future CSM members came (by order of alliance size ofc) from those entities. But maybe I'll be proven all wrong and the conspiracy theory is true...
|
Axexut
Caldari
AWE Corporation
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 07:35:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Axexut on 22/05/2010 07:43:29
Konoch - shush. You are sounding like a spoiled child.
I am also a candidate. IF my guys were strong enough to vote me in - great!
If not . . . . awww.
But you are trying to justify votes post election. And to cast aspersions on those Alliances greater then yours. Either man up and make yours better, or join IT and their efforts in this case.
But stop *****ing. Maybe neither of us made it in. That's OUR people's faults and our only own.
|
xCaedo
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 09:55:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Dillon Arklight
A quick thought about the increased voting turnout.
I was wondering how many players with multiple accounts only voted with one of them.
Personally i have multiple accounts but i don't like the idea of casting more than one vote as it dosen't seem democratic. I know its probbaly impossible to tell how many people voted more than once but its something to consider when looking at the voting statistics.
I have cast my votes to the same person this year with my 3 accounts, (still waiting for that 30.00 isk aswell) but i would consider splitting my votes if each candidate would better for example my industrial char and the other would benefit my PvP char, any ignore all that when is Season 3 starting Dillon??? ;) enjoy the rest
|
Fade Toblack
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 10:45:00 -
[56]
Multiple accounts getting multiple votes - actually I see this as being fairer. If you're willing to pay for 2 or 3 (or more) accounts, then surely you should have 2 or 3 (or more) times the say over the future of the game.
|
Konoch
Caldari
Northstar Cabal
OWN Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 13:10:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Dlardrageth
Okay, for the sake of the argument then... You adressed "mega alliances". Assuming you picked your phrase carefully there, that makes all alliances with "mega" member numbers, aka in excess of 1K members viable. With regards to your point of "block voting"/"taking over CSM" or however you do want to call it.
By current in-game listing there are over 30 of those. Compared to the number of available CSM seats and the posted votes required to get a CSM seat / alternate spot that would logically imply, that if your assumption were right, all, or maybe all but one seat on the CSM would go to those alliances. History of recent CSM panels does not really support this, but well, maybe this time it all changed?
So if you were correct, we'd see on the next CSM panel (almost) exclusively members of those "mega alliances", IF your assumption were right that those were trying to "take over" the CSM. More so, as we cannot be sure that someone external might "accidentally" vote for one of the candidates from those alliances (Gods beware!), as they might raise some valid point in their campaign. Going by sheer numbers under the assumption you are right (and myself wrong about lots of 0.0 not caring a whit about CSM), we'll see come next week a (almost) full 0.0 alliance-stocked CSM, right?
Would be utterly surprised if that would happen, I'd actually still be surprised if only half the future CSM members came (by order of alliance size ofc) from those entities. But maybe I'll be proven all wrong and the conspiracy theory is true...
Yeah. I did. But your missing the focus slightly. I meant NC and SC in this regard. (And yeah i am with an NC corp) And i'll state it again, without names i can only speculate. But voting was substantially higher than in the previous four elections and there is a huge war raging. If you look at the general situation and see the signs you see what appears to be powerblock voting. Without the winners what i've stated is speculation. Speculation based on the evidence but still speculation. I'm not backing off my position that it appears the Big groups voted in blocks. 1k votes per candidate that got in. That's a shocking number.
And yes, i think it has changed. I think that both sides wish to influence the war and that this would be one heck of a way to do it. Honestly? I hope your right that it isn't packed with zero sec alliances. And i still hold out hope my vote was one of the ones that put T'amber in. But that isn't looking good. Names will tell the tale and if this spike in voting was EVE being more politically aware then i will be one happy guy even if T'amber doesn't make it in. But given the following: The massive voter spike, The conflict up north, H-W, and the zero sec heavy agenda of these candidates. I'm forced to believe that something less than perfect was at work here.
|
Dillon Arklight
Universal Army
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 15:43:00 -
[58]
Edited by: Dillon Arklight on 22/05/2010 15:43:03
Originally by: Fade Toblack
Multiple accounts getting multiple votes - actually I see this as being fairer. If you're willing to pay for 2 or 3 (or more) accounts, then surely you should have 2 or 3 (or more) times the say over the future of the game.
Based on that should a person who pays more tax have more say in how a country is run? Yeah i know EVE isn't like the real world, just a comparison.
By some quirk of fate for the next month I have 5 accounts. Do i really deserve 5 times the say in the games development?
Oh and thanks for the graph Diagoras, more please!
|
Cyrus Doul
Cosmic Vacum Cleaners
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 16:36:00 -
[59]
You guys know more about this then I do, but whats the breakdown of who voted by percentage of accounts that actually had a logon during the voting month? Like I have 3 accounts that autobill to my CC so they would remain active but I might have not been around for the month due to X and didn't even know. That would give you a better breakdown of who actually cared to vote or not instead of who voted / (didnt vote + mega afk)
|
Dlardrageth
ANZAC ALLIANCE
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 19:06:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Dillon Arklight
Edited by: Dillon Arklight on 22/05/2010 15:43:03
Originally by: Fade Toblack
Multiple accounts getting multiple votes - actually I see this as being fairer. If you're willing to pay for 2 or 3 (or more) accounts, then surely you should have 2 or 3 (or more) times the say over the future of the game.
Based on that should a person who pays more tax have more say in how a country is run? Yeah i know EVE isn't like the real world, just a comparison.[...]
You would be surprised. Look up "Timocracy" in a good encyclopedia, or prolly even Wikipedia. The greeks of antiquitiy didn't think too badly about that. As opposed to some comments about democracy occasionally made. Just as a footnote, personally I don't think CSM elections rank as truly "democratic" if the majority of players abstains. Thus prolly some bastard-child of political theory anway...
|
Elojs
Gallente
Corp 42
Fuzzy Nut Attack Squirrels
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 19:43:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Originally by: Tribalist
What we need is "Chicago Politics" i.e. The ability buy proxies and vote the dead...
The Chicago motto is: vote early and often.
... and in every precinct.
|
Radius Prime
|
Posted - 2010.05.22 21:44:00 -
[62]
I think people are over analyzing this election a bit. The increase in votes is easily explained by the growing amount of players combined with the easy access to vote in the startup screen. I think more "silent majority" high sec newcomers (like me) have used their vote. That said, some results will surprise the oldskool establishment in eve most likely. People who were given a high spot in the voting list and took their time to put in decent campaign letter will be rewarded. New people don`t know any of the names on that list and wont vote for "big headed alliance bobble heads who don't even take time to put in campaign letter" as they don`t show commitment, solid program or willingness to defend rights of the small players...
As for big nullsec alliances taking over.. Most are competing I would think , so they will only undermine each other in the council and work counterproductive. It made me laugh when some people said it would influence the outcome of major conflicts... It wont , the council has the power of suggestion only , their mandate doesn't include decision making , and that`s probably the reason why major alliances have never taken a firmer grip over the election.
I think the council overall is a good idea and will help greatly with improving the game by suggestion game adjustments to the devs. Fresh ideas keep game young. The trip to Iceland is a well deserved reward for those who help the game advance selflessly every day and that`s what it's all about in the end :).
Just my 2 cents
|
Entaran
Caldari
Metalworks
Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2010.05.23 09:37:00 -
[63]
Edited by: Entaran on 23/05/2010 09:39:46
I voted a significant (10+) number of times across three candidates tbh
Vuk got a single vote from me after the mass NC alliance mail went out saying "A-K VOTE VUK, L-Z VOTE ELVEN" or whatever their names were.
Vast majority of my votes went to a dude from IT Alliance and a dude from an Empire corp.
The fact that lemmings will listen to people who TELL THEM how to vote is hilarious, tbh I think in the CSM if this sort of crap is uncovered on forums or in alliance mails it should automatically DQ the candidate. But that's another can of worms entirely. It's totally not enforceable (and so open to exploitation it's crazy)
---
Here's the mail that went around the NC:
Originally by: NCMail
Vote for CSM NOW
From: ----------
Sent: 2010.05.11 19:16
To: Majesta Empire,
Ladies and gents,
Are you blackscreened in game? Enjoying too much lag in H-W local? Now is the perfect time to register your votes for CSM.
This is an important vote because -IT- has two candidates who are getting loads of votes, and we would really like to see Vuk Lau and Elvenlord, from Morsus Mihi, get elected once again. These two guys have a proven track record of working hard on the CSM to enact real change for real pilots like you and I. So we need EVERYBODY to log in all their accounts (one vote per paid account) and vote.
Read their excellent thread here and see the positive words from guys all across the NC and even some guys who are in-game enemies of ME. Vuk and Elven are excellent candidates but they need YOUR VOTES
Go here and sign in to vote for other candidates, or follow the links below:
- If the main character on the account you're voting with has a name begining with A to K you Vote Vuk Lau
- If the main character on the account you're voting with has a name begining with L to Z you Vote ElvenLord
Spread the word to your non-ME friends and in-game mates, and let's crank the vote out while there is still time left! VOTING ENDS SOON SO VOTE RIGHT AWAY!
Lots of laggy carebear kisses,
-------------
|
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.23 09:55:00 -
[64]
Over 300 thousand people abstained. |
Dasola
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.05.23 11:05:00 -
[65]
So only 12% of player base voted? Thats pretty low and in my opinion only indicates how little CSM has managed to impact this game so far.
Stability of game system is worse then ever in my playing courier of this game.
New features are halfdone and abandoned pretty soon after release.
So exactly why do we even need CSM when it has no effect other then handfull of people gets free trip to iceland? Bringing things into csm meeteings is one thing, results is another.
If i would get my way, i would push bugfix release and delay new content untill new content is feature ready to release. No half baked **** like were getting now. PI lacks that little thing called nuke from orbit they showed us year ago in fanfest. How come its missing? Becouse ccp dosent care and csm dosent care.
|
Mynxee
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2010.05.23 12:15:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Dasola
So only 12% of player base voted?
12% of eligible accounts (not players)...and it's almost twice the amount as voted for CSM4. A very big increase.
Originally by: Dasola
So exactly why do we even need CSM when it has no effect other then handfull of people gets free trip to iceland? Bringing things into csm meeteings is one thing, results is another.
Don't forget that CCP is giving the CSM stakeholder status as of CSM5. It remains to be seen how that will play out to players' benefit, but it will entitle the CSM to more of a voice than ever before. It's up to the CSM to use that voice effectively, while recognizing that the ability to influence change in EVE is subject to practical constraints imposed by CCP. Those constraints include resource availability, bottom line considerations, software development timelines in general, CCP's current vision for the various elements of EVE, and obstacles that may arise due to CCP's corporate culture. It is vital that the CSM recognize those constraints and--where possible--suggest creative ways around them.
From the outside looking in, it may seem as if the CSM accomplishes very little. However, don't forget--as Teadaze has often commented in CSM4's meeting minutes--that a lot of the discussion that takes place between the CSM and CCP cannot be shared with players due to NDA restrictions. So just because you don't hear about certain things being discussed or addressed, it doesn't mean they aren't on the radar.
Life In Low Sec |
Roxy McFubar
|
Posted - 2010.05.23 13:02:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Mynxee
There are plenty of people who just log in, play the game, and simply fail to tune in to anything external to the game.
Or maybe they simply, and reasonably, have no interest in the CSM. They just want to play the game for a few hours after work, relax and have fun. It's a hobby. They have no interest in "external" anything because that's not what they play EvE for.
|
Mynxee
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2010.05.23 13:22:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Roxy McFubar
Or maybe they simply, and reasonably, have no interest in the CSM. They just want to play the game for a few hours after work, relax and have fun. It's a hobby. They have no interest in "external" anything because that's not what they play EvE for.
Of course. I know quite a few players like that. I used to be one. Someday, though, something in the game or their outlook may change enough to make them take an interest in the CSM and its work. Or who knows--maybe something the CSM itself does will get their attention and motivate more interest.
Life In Low Sec |
Napro
Caldari
Buccaneers of New Eden
death from above..
|
Posted - 2010.05.23 14:24:00 -
[69]
I only voted and campaigned for Cat!
It's important we have a voice of reason on the CSM!
|
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.23 15:58:00 -
[70]
300 thousand people don't know they are buying a free holiday for some fevered egos. |
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.05.23 16:06:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
300 thousand people don't know they are buying a free holiday for some fevered egos.
They don't know that they are paying for the regular passing out due to alcohol overdose of an entire multimedia company either - so what's the difference?
There are many options for CCP to improve on their game, most of which are an order of magnitude more expensive than 9 airline tickets and a few hotel nights. And if you still think that the CSM is a 'pr-stunt' or 'ineffective at accomplishing anything', you have but to thank your own voluntary ignorance.
|
Spectral Kat
|
Posted - 2010.05.23 22:04:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Mynxee
Edited by: Mynxee on 21/05/2010 12:40:01
Originally by: Dillon Arklight
Personally i have multiple accounts but i don't like the idea of casting more than one vote as it dosen't seem democratic. I know its probbaly impossible to tell how many people voted more than once but its something to consider when looking at the voting statistics.
I think almost everyone with >1 account votes with each of them. You can see that by the comments of support throughout various candidates' threads. Since there's no practical way of limiting votes by individual persons, doing it by authenticated (via login) account is the only realistic option. It doesn't make any sense not to cast all your allowed votes due to philosophical reasons. Everyone else will be giving full support to their preferred candidates; you might as well do so, too -- next time around :).
I miss your podcast
Is this an admission that you voted for yourself?
Charming.
|
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.23 23:06:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Sokratesz
And if you still think that the CSM is a 'pr-stunt' or 'ineffective at accomplishing anything', you have but to thank your own voluntary ignorance.
Calling on your proof.
Please supply that which you have chosen to accept as proof, since you cannot provide any actual real proof.
|
Mynxee
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2010.05.23 23:22:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Spectral Kat
Is this an admission that you voted for yourself?
Charming.
Of course I did. Why wouldn't I? Although I gave serious consideration to giving Teadaze one of my two votes because I feel so strongly that he deserves to be on CSM5.
Life In Low Sec |
Serkaan
|
Posted - 2010.05.24 04:23:00 -
[75]
Edited by: Serkaan on 24/05/2010 04:23:59
Originally by: Extreme
Edited by: Extreme on 20/05/2010 13:12:08
It is just an epic failure that the first days of voting there was displayed a static list of candidates.
We filed the importance of the problem about the advantage that one have that is listed on top of that list and yet the change wasn't made in time.
Personally i won't jump on the bandwagon concerning Ankh, i have no problem with her and she was ok to work with while i was in CSM-2.
But i'll tell you that Ankh will have 2500 extra votes due to this epic failure of a static list of candidates.
/X
Quit Crying people are gonna vote for who they want to vote for. How would you display the list
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Initiative Mercenaries
|
Posted - 2010.05.24 04:23:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Radius Prime
I think people are over analyzing this election a bit. The increase in votes is easily explained by the growing amount of players combined with the easy access to vote in the startup screen. I think more "silent majority" high sec newcomers (like me) have used their vote. That said, some results will surprise the oldskool establishment in eve most likely. People who were given a high spot in the voting list and took their time to put in decent campaign letter will be rewarded. New people don`t know any of the names on that list and wont vote for "big headed alliance bobble heads who don't even take time to put in campaign letter" as they don`t show commitment, solid program or willingness to defend rights of the small players...
Nice theory, though it ignores that the last couple of CSMs only had unknown people with no real forum track records running due to the term limits.
If you think previous CSM candidates didn't have solid programs then you likely have only paid attention the last couple elections when the bottom of the dregs were running. This election had all the big names running with programs that were reminiscent of the first CSM, and that is why we've seen a resurge.
So your theory on why the turnout was low is not so easily explained by mere easy access, etc.
And if you think null sec alliances are the ones that are counterproductive and difficult to work with, then you haven't read CSM meeting transcripts much. It's invariably the 'independent' candidates that are difficult to deal with, while even alliances like the goons had elected members that were rational and cooperative.
There's surprisingly little faction based rivalry... Likely cause people who live in 0.0 sec alliances are used to having codependent relationships with people.
|
Mechael
|
Posted - 2010.05.24 04:39:00 -
[77]
Normally I hate democracy, but there are two things that caused me to vote in this CSM when I had not voted in any of the previous ones. Firstly, the advertisements on the login screen. Secondly, the ease with which I was able to find information on the various candidates right on the voting page. Sadly, many of them did not have any information displayed, but I read through those who did and was able to make a reasonably informed decision on my vote. (Only one candidate mentioned TRADE and the MARKET in their little blurb info.)
I'm not a regular forum user. Personally, I dislike forums for reasons I'm not gonna go into. Those two little changes made a BIG difference in changing my opinion about voting.
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.05.24 09:27:00 -
[78]
Edited by: Sokratesz on 24/05/2010 09:37:39
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Originally by: Sokratesz
And if you still think that the CSM is a 'pr-stunt' or 'ineffective at accomplishing anything', you have but to thank your own voluntary ignorance.
Calling on your proof.
Please supply that which you have chosen to accept as proof, since you cannot provide any actual real proof.
I was going to just call you a troll and let it be but since this is going on eve-search for evah, and others might find it some day and may wonder the same thing genuinly, I'm actually going to bother looking up some proof for you:
General information about CSM
Members of CSM4
Many other important links
CSM4 Iceland meeting minutes
Xhagen's blog about CSM4
Future of the CSM
|
Nyphur
Pillowsoft
Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2010.05.24 10:39:00 -
[79]
See that little spike at May 10th that lasted a few days? It could be a complete coincidence but May 10th was the day we did a big CSM candidate roundup at Massively in an effort to get more people voting. Maybe it had an effect!
|
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.05.24 10:55:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Nyphur
See that little spike at May 10th that lasted a few days? It could be a complete coincidence but May 10th was the day we did a big CSM candidate roundup at Massively in an effort to get more people voting. Maybe it had an effect!
I'm pretty certain that the Massively article helped with the increased voter turnout. For comparison my site went from 3000 to 8000 hits per day for the three days after that article (there was also a 3 day bump to about 4500 hits a day when the voting opened and a similar 5 day bump just before polls closed).
Many thanks for putting together the article 
TeaDaze.net |
Mynxee
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2010.05.24 11:19:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Nyphur
See that little spike at May 10th that lasted a few days? It could be a complete coincidence but May 10th was the day we did a big CSM candidate roundup at Massively in an effort to get more people voting. Maybe it had an effect!
Yup, sorry I forgot to mention that in my earlier post on things that influenced voter turnout--your article certainly helped. I notice that my blog got double its normal traffic that day. Traffic then tapered off from that high over the next couple of days back to normal. Thanks!
Life In Low Sec |
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.05.24 12:02:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Nyphur
See that little spike at May 10th that lasted a few days? It could be a complete coincidence but May 10th was the day we did a big CSM candidate roundup at Massively in an effort to get more people voting. Maybe it had an effect!
I already said it elsewhere, but yes, that probably helped a lot and I found it to be pretty accurate overall. Thanks for the effort
|
Extreme
Eye of God
|
Posted - 2010.05.24 12:12:00 -
[83]
I'm just curious on the percentual outcome on casted votes per candidate in the days that the list was a static one compared to the casted votes when thy randomised the candidates.
Did it prove my case or not?
.
.
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.05.24 12:19:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Extreme
I'm just curious on the percentual outcome on casted votes per candidate in the days that the list was a static one compared to the casted votes when thy randomised the candidates.
Did it prove my case or not?
It's been established several times that in RL elections, the top of the list gets more votes simply because of them being on top..whether it carries over to EVE I don't know but I doubt it will have made a significant impact on these elections. (results pending..)
|
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
|
Posted - 2010.05.24 13:15:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Nyphur
See that little spike at May 10th that lasted a few days? It could be a complete coincidence but May 10th was the day we did a big CSM candidate roundup at Massively in an effort to get more people voting. Maybe it had an effect!
I've definitely seen a very tangible number of hits on my candidacy page having massively as a referer... So I'd say it did.
|
Ashina Sito
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2010.05.24 19:51:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Mynxee
Originally by: Nyphur
See that little spike at May 10th that lasted a few days? It could be a complete coincidence but May 10th was the day we did a big CSM candidate roundup at Massively in an effort to get more people voting. Maybe it had an effect!
Yup, sorry I forgot to mention that in my earlier post on things that influenced voter turnout--your article certainly helped. I notice that my blog got double its normal traffic that day. Traffic then tapered off from that high over the next couple of days back to normal. Thanks!
Wonderful, an article that largely dismissed 2 thirds of the candidates brought in a sizable bump to the voter roles. By dismissed I mean that the organizational method was to group candidates together was, Past Members of the CSM, new people, people with no information.
Past CSM members already have an advantage and by listing them first it gave them yet another one. With Information overload do to the high number of candidates the first few listed would be looked over and the further a candidate was on the list the more likely the reader would have decided to stop.
I made the same comment on the thread about the article. To be honest, it's not like there is a better method of presenting such a large number of candidates. In the future it should be easier. Ankh and the Take Care party are a sign of things to come, political parties for the CSM. The parties themselves will edit down the potential candidate list.
I will also put forward the question, why are candidates with no information even listed in voting?
While I have no issue with someone not making a major campaign effort it is somewhat confusing that you would have a candidate with nothing beyond a name. These type of "empty shirts" got less then 100 votes in the last election. That is a number of votes that tell me they attracted no one but their in game friends/contacts.
Should CCP enlist a slightly tighter restriction on the CSM candidates? I don't see how a candidate can garnish enough votes to be elected if they do not even post any candidate information at all. If someone can not even put, "Vote for me" in the campaign info window, how could they be a good candidate for CSM? If they can not tap their keyboard 11 times to post a message I don't see how they would find the energy to put for the the effort to be an effective CSM member.
On the flip side you have the slippery slope, once you restrict the candidates where will it end? Well, at least my prattling will end here...
My CSM Election Announcement
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.05.24 20:41:00 -
[87]
I seriously doubt that you will ever see political parties in EVE remotely resembling RL ones. Take care after all is just 'Ankh Inc.'
|
Qujulome
Amarr
|
Posted - 2010.05.25 04:25:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Ashina Sito
Should CCP enlist a slightly tighter restriction on the CSM candidates? I don't see how a candidate can garnish enough votes to be elected if they do not even post any candidate information at all. If someone can not even put, "Vote for me" in the campaign info window, how could they be a good candidate for CSM? If they can not tap their keyboard 11 times to post a message I don't see how they would find the energy to put for the the effort to be an effective CSM member.
In Australian Elections there is a cost for nomination, plus you need a number of signatures before you can nominate. This fee is refunded if you get more than 3% of the vote.
I would support an Isk cost for running.
|
Dierdra Vaal
Caldari
Eve University
Ivy League
|
Posted - 2010.05.25 09:20:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Sokratesz
I seriously doubt that you will ever see political parties in EVE remotely resembling RL ones. Take care after all is just 'Ankh Inc.'
(this will only make sense to dutch players)
To be fair, isn't the PVV simply 'Wilders Inc.'?
If we would go to a point where you need 5000-6000 votes to be on the CSM, I think it would be quite likely to see some more parties form.
Director of Education :: EVE University
CSM1 delegate and CSM3 chairman
|
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.05.25 10:15:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Qujulome
I would support an Isk cost for running.
Not everyone who has isk is a worthy candidate just as not everybody without isk is a bad candidate.
If there was an isk cost it would have to be significant to have any impact (many billions) and the result would be that people such as myself wouldn't be able to take part...
TeaDaze.net |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft
Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2010.05.25 10:56:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Ashina Sito
Wonderful, an article that largely dismissed 2 thirds of the candidates brought in a sizable bump to the voter roles. By dismissed I mean that the organizational method was to group candidates together was, Past Members of the CSM, new people, people with no information.
Unfortuantely, as you said, there isn't really any other way to present that kind of information on so many candidates. It's not feasible to do them all on one page due to Massively's page styles and the fact that people will only scroll down so much. So I listed the three pages in order of who I had the most information on, and that meant putting previous CSM members on the first page.
If it helps put your mind at rest, we had an abnormally high rate of hit conversion from page 1 to page 2. About 90% of the people that visited page 1 went on to page 2, but few people went to page 3. So everyone but the relatively unknown players got a very similar level of coverage. It was unusual because we usually lose as many people going from page 1 to 2 of a three-page article as going from 2 to 3. People really must have wanted to see all the candidates worth voting for.
|
Gray Lobo
Caldari
MRA
|
Posted - 2010.05.25 12:23:00 -
[92]
Wow Thats an incredible increase of voter turn out but the fact that only 12.67% where involved is still a bit disheartening. T_T I can't wate to see the results tomorrow.
Eagles may fly high, but weasels doesn't get sucked into a jet engine now do they? |
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.05.25 13:00:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Dierdra Vaal
Originally by: Sokratesz
I seriously doubt that you will ever see political parties in EVE remotely resembling RL ones. Take care after all is just 'Ankh Inc.'
(this will only make sense to dutch players)
To be fair, isn't the PVV simply 'Wilders Inc.'?
Yeah but he isn't a party in the classical sense and should be taken as serious as Ankh, too..
|
N1ko Belic
|
Posted - 2010.05.25 14:29:00 -
[94]
I voted abstain all all 4 of my accounts as i have done every time.
The CSM is full of powerblocks making sure they have there rep(s) in Hell the NC even sent mails out to coordinate who was to vote for who.
Much like in RL it doesnt matter who you vote for the crap still get in
|
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
|
Posted - 2010.05.25 15:50:00 -
[95]
Originally by: N1ko Belic
I voted abstain all all 4 of my accounts as i have done every time.
The CSM is full of powerblocks making sure they have there rep(s) in Hell the NC even sent mails out to coordinate who was to vote for who.
Much like in RL it doesnt matter who you vote for the crap still get in
If your reason for not voting is that the CSM is full of powerbloc representative, wouldn't the logical course of action be to vote for a candidate that is not in a powerbloc?
Self-fulfilling prophecy and all that...
|
T'Amber
www.shipsofeve.com
|
Posted - 2010.05.25 17:34:00 -
[96]
Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
Originally by: N1ko Belic
I voted abstain all all 4 of my accounts as i have done every time.
The CSM is full of powerblocks making sure they have there rep(s) in Hell the NC even sent mails out to coordinate who was to vote for who.
Much like in RL it doesnt matter who you vote for the crap still get in
If your reason for not voting is that the CSM is full of powerbloc representative, wouldn't the logical course of action be to vote for a candidate that is not in a powerbloc?
Self-fulfilling prophecy and all that...
^^^^^^^^^
Even better, vote for someone in a corp all to themself.
-T'amber
SHIPS OF EVE FIVE
|
Ashina Sito
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2010.05.25 20:05:00 -
[97]
Originally by: T'Amber
Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
Originally by: N1ko Belic
I voted abstain all all 4 of my accounts as i have done every time.
The CSM is full of powerblocks making sure they have there rep(s) in Hell the NC even sent mails out to coordinate who was to vote for who.
Much like in RL it doesnt matter who you vote for the crap still get in
If your reason for not voting is that the CSM is full of powerbloc representative, wouldn't the logical course of action be to vote for a candidate that is not in a powerbloc?
Self-fulfilling prophecy and all that...
^^^^^^^^^
Even better, vote for someone in a corp all to themself.
-T'amber
Or better yet, an NPC corp!
My CSM Election Announcement
|
Cinori Aluben
Minmatar
Gladiators of Rage
Opticon Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.26 01:55:00 -
[98]
=(
---
Cinori Aluben -- CSM 2010!!
"Fix the Little Things First!"
http://www.littlethingsfirst.com |
|
CCP Diagoras
C C P Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.26 09:56:00 -
[99]
Full results can now be read in this dev blog.
_______________
CCP Diagoras
Research and Statistics |
|
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.26 10:55:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Sokratesz
Edited by: Sokratesz on 24/05/2010 09:37:39
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Originally by: Sokratesz
And if you still think that the CSM is a 'pr-stunt' or 'ineffective at accomplishing anything', you have but to thank your own voluntary ignorance.
Calling on your proof.
Please supply that which you have chosen to accept as proof, since you cannot provide any actual real proof.
I was going to just call you a troll and let it be but since this is going on eve-search for evah, and others might find it some day and may wonder the same thing genuinly, I'm actually going to bother looking up some proof for you:
General information about CSM
Members of CSM4
Many other important links
CSM4 Iceland meeting minutes
Xhagen's blog about CSM4
Future of the CSM
None of that is proof.
1. It's marketting not pr. PR was when Hilmar promised a solution to the T20 problem in the new york times. Marketing is the CSM.
2. CCP developed Eve long before the CSM they never wanted us to have.
3. I see you're in line for a free holiday, and your bias couldn't be more obvious therefore.
4. That's why you think any of that is proof of anything. Which it absolutely is not.
Can the lies please stop?
Your ridiculous attempt at providing proof has missed out the following important issues that do not suit your new free holiday:-
1. CCP never mentioned anything about CSMs until they got caught sponsoring cheating by a whistleblower who got banned.
2. CCP promised a strong independent CSM that could and would ensure T20 could never happen again.
3. CCP introduced a weak marketing exercise called the CSM and promised at release that it will NEVER be able to force CCP into any action at all ever under any circumstances.
4. CCP have developed and continue to develop Eve Online without regard for what the CSM has to say, which is how it should be.
Thus far, the only thing we can say with absolute certainty about the CSM is that is has actually ENABLED key people to cheat ironically the opposite of what we were originally told it would be for.
And before you start crying, you seem to be good at internet searching, but maybe now is a good time to start practising looking up information you don't like. |
Fatmarrow
Minmatar
Galactic-Empire
|
Posted - 2010.05.26 13:17:00 -
[101]
I would like to take this opportunity to say congratulations to all of the successful candidates in the CSM elections.
It was a very enlightening process and I would salute those candidates who put a lot of effort into their campaign (win or lose) and those rose above the mud-slinging to provide interesting debate. I may not be flying to Iceland (on someone else's dollar anyway) but I hope I can help in some way with the CSM process regardless. Good luck guys :)
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.05.26 13:30:00 -
[102]
Edited by: Sokratesz on 26/05/2010 13:31:04
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Originally by: Sokratesz
Edited by: Sokratesz on 24/05/2010 09:37:39
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Originally by: Sokratesz
And if you still think that the CSM is a 'pr-stunt' or 'ineffective at accomplishing anything', you have but to thank your own voluntary ignorance.
Calling on your proof.
Please supply that which you have chosen to accept as proof, since you cannot provide any actual real proof.
I was going to just call you a troll and let it be but since this is going on eve-search for evah, and others might find it some day and may wonder the same thing genuinly, I'm actually going to bother looking up some proof for you:
General information about CSM
Members of CSM4
Many other important links
CSM4 Iceland meeting minutes
Xhagen's blog about CSM4
Future of the CSM
None of that is proof.
1. It's marketting not pr. PR was when Hilmar promised a solution to the T20 problem in the new york times. Marketing is the CSM.
2. CCP developed Eve long before the CSM they never wanted us to have.
3. I see you're in line for a free holiday, and your bias couldn't be more obvious therefore.
4. That's why you think any of that is proof of anything. Which it absolutely is not.
Can the lies please stop?
Your ridiculous attempt at providing proof has missed out the following important issues that do not suit your new free holiday:-
1. CCP never mentioned anything about CSMs until they got caught sponsoring cheating by a whistleblower who got banned.
2. CCP promised a strong independent CSM that could and would ensure T20 could never happen again.
3. CCP introduced a weak marketing exercise called the CSM and promised at release that it will NEVER be able to force CCP into any action at all ever under any circumstances.
4. CCP have developed and continue to develop Eve Online without regard for what the CSM has to say, which is how it should be.
Thus far, the only thing we can say with absolute certainty about the CSM is that is has actually ENABLED key people to cheat ironically the opposite of what we were originally told it would be for.
And before you start crying, you seem to be good at internet searching, but maybe now is a good time to start practising looking up information you don't like.
Did I mention you are wrong on several points? No? Because you sure as hell are, but don't let that change your view of things.
|
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.26 14:53:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Sokratesz
Edited by: Sokratesz on 26/05/2010 14:00:21
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
None of that is proof.
1. It's marketting not pr. PR was when Hilmar promised a solution to the T20 problem in the new york times. Marketing is the CSM.
2. CCP developed Eve long before the CSM they never wanted us to have.
3. I see you're in line for a free holiday, and your bias couldn't be more obvious therefore.
4. That's why you think any of that is proof of anything. Which it absolutely is not.
Can the lies please stop?
Your ridiculous attempt at providing proof has missed out the following important issues that do not suit your new free holiday:-
1. CCP never mentioned anything about CSMs until they got caught sponsoring cheating by a whistleblower who got banned.
2. CCP promised a strong independent CSM that could and would ensure T20 could never happen again.
3. CCP introduced a weak marketing exercise called the CSM and promised at release that it will NEVER be able to force CCP into any action at all ever under any circumstances.
4. CCP have developed and continue to develop Eve Online without regard for what the CSM has to say, which is how it should be.
Thus far, the only thing we can say with absolute certainty about the CSM is that is has actually ENABLED key people to cheat ironically the opposite of what we were originally told it would be for.
And before you start crying, you seem to be good at internet searching, but maybe now is a good time to start practising looking up information you don't like.
Did I mention yet that you are wrong on several points? No? Because you sure as hell are, but don't let that change your view of things.
It used to be the first to say "troll" wins. Now it is attempted that the first person who says "Hater" wins.
In reality, both have always been capitulation. Thanks for conceding. You could have done it in a way so that your less intelligent fanboiz could understand it though.
Hopefully they can see it.
Claim Victory.
Say Hater.
Run like hell.
Feel free to look up and understand things you don't want to read. Try it some time. It will make you more powerful.
Though it's certainly not a requirement to get on a plane to Iceland and have long conversations about what colour toilet paper CCP should use, or perhaps some topics that CCP will simply ignore anyway.
Bye bye small fry.
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.05.26 15:19:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
In reality, both have always been capitulation. Thanks for conceding. You could have done it in a way so that your less intelligent fanboiz could understand it though.
Hopefully they can see it.
Claim Victory.
Say Hater.
Run like hell.
Feel free to look up and understand things you don't want to read. Try it some time. It will make you more powerful.
Though it's certainly not a requirement to get on a plane to Iceland and have long conversations about what colour toilet paper CCP should use, or perhaps some topics that CCP will simply ignore anyway.
Since you cannot be bothered to educate yourself about the topic at hand, I feel no need to make any effort towards you. Your cheap shots at me and the CSM are mere symptoms of your voluntary ignorance.
Some people will just hate the concept of the CSM, which is fine. In the meantime I will be trying to actually use the tools that CCP have handed us in order to improve the game for everyone.
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Bye bye small fry.
Contrary to Ankh and her puzzle pirates, I am actually relevant in EVE.
|
Gavjack Bunk
|
Posted - 2010.05.26 20:51:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
In reality, both have always been capitulation. Thanks for conceding. You could have done it in a way so that your less intelligent fanboiz could understand it though.
Hopefully they can see it.
Claim Victory.
Say Hater.
Run like hell.
Feel free to look up and understand things you don't want to read. Try it some time. It will make you more powerful.
Though it's certainly not a requirement to get on a plane to Iceland and have long conversations about what colour toilet paper CCP should use, or perhaps some topics that CCP will simply ignore anyway.
Since you cannot be bothered to educate yourself about the topic at hand, I feel no need to make any effort towards you. Your cheap shots at me and the CSM are mere symptoms of your voluntary ignorance.
Some people will just hate the concept of the CSM, which is fine. In the meantime I will be trying to actually use the tools that CCP have handed us in order to improve the game for everyone.
Your assertion that I am not educated is incorrect. To be honest, if I had your skills and your bias, I too would scream soundbites and hide from a clearly superior opponent. Since you have chosen that stance, could you do it quietly?
You won't be improving Eve at all. It's really that simple. CCP will be improving Eve. You'll be getting patted on the head and you will be told by your idols that you are doing really well, but you won't be achieving a single thing that you will comprehend.
If you think different, try changing something CCP don't want you anywhere near. Go on... I know you won't. Ankh won't get her weird ideas implemented. It simply won't happen.
Unfortunately this tactic is entirely contractory to your blind insistence that you are now empowered. You will not see your next year of utter pointlessness and failure as anything other than unlimited power to wield over Eve. There is plenty of counter to your bizarre assertions, but until you have grown to the point where you can counter your own argument, you will remain as weak as you appear today.
Just keep it simple. Say "troll" say "hater" and walk away. It's pretty much all you're any use for. Which is ample qualification for the CSM.
It's clear you NEED the last word, and frankly, since you're part of CCP's marketing machine now, and I refuse to carry that role for them, I'm the one about to be forum banned if I continue this any further, you'd better just take that last word and make it sizzle yeah? You got a legion of CSM fanboiz just waiting for you to BURN the heretic publicly.
Go ahead small fry. Make me burn.
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.05.26 21:24:00 -
[106]
Le sigh
Wear tinfoil to fanfest..or CCP might get into your head and make you think they actually mean well.
|
Dlardrageth
ANZAC ALLIANCE
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 11:51:00 -
[107]
Originally by: CCP Diagoras
Full results can now be read in this dev blog.
Since when is it "full results", when you don't list the votes for those candidates that didn't make CSM or alternate slots? Kinda weird... just saying...
|
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 14:10:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Dlardrageth
Originally by: CCP Diagoras
Full results can now be read in this dev blog.
Since when is it "full results", when you don't list the votes for those candidates that didn't make CSM or alternate slots? Kinda weird... just saying...
At the left of the forum open up Eve Insider / CSM / Results (need to be logged in).
Would be nice if the link was in the devblog but they were at least released.
TeaDaze.net |
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 21:26:00 -
[109]
Originally by: TeaDaze
Originally by: Dlardrageth
Originally by: CCP Diagoras
Full results can now be read in this dev blog.
Since when is it "full results", when you don't list the votes for those candidates that didn't make CSM or alternate slots? Kinda weird... just saying...
At the left of the forum open up Eve Insider / CSM / Results (need to be logged in).
Would be nice if the link was in the devblog but they were at least released.
Took me a few minutes to figure that out yesterday =P
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |