|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4506
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 08:02:00 -
[1] - Quote
Voting for a candidate because they are "hisec" or"0.0" or whatever is simply stupid.
Vote for a candidate because they have game knowledge and a conception of the game that impresses you, not because one character on one of their accounts spends some of its time in the same type of space as one of yours does. If I ran for the CSM on my cyno alt would that make me suddenly a losec candidate? (Maybe I should; shes prettier than Malc) Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4507
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 08:31:00 -
[2] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Andski wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Leaving over 80% of the population out of the voting process makes no sense considering it would be rather easy to know how many are apathetic and how many just don't know. They're not being left out. They're blatantly being asked to participate and they choose to ignore it. Already been over the Banners on login ect.. Andski. If people do not know what a CSM is how do they know what they are not voting for.
Why do you want people who are so indifferent to the process participating in it? What good result do you expect? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4509
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 10:40:00 -
[3] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that all the hi-sec folk (those stupid folk who do not care about Eve etc) did decide to vote, and voted en masse for a candidate who wanted pvp in hi- sec to be consensual only, would this be acceptable?
Them bein' in the majority an' all.
That'd be fine. One guy out of fourteen can't force the CSM to adopt any position, and even if they could the CSM can't force CCP to betray a core principle. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4512
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 10:15:00 -
[4] - Quote
Where is the evidence that "only 0.0 players vote"? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4515
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 10:27:00 -
[5] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:I think it is time we have 'official' representatives instead of a popular vote lets spit the CSM's into regional electorate districts based on population distribution from Dr E's last fanfest statistics of where characters live total of 10 CSM's: 2 NULL 1WH 1Lo 6 HI SEC DISCUSS
Here's your discussion: apathetic mission runners and ice miners still won't vote. Hi-sec alts of 0.0 players will carve up those 6 seats between them and totally own the CSM even more easily than they do now. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4515
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 10:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
Signal11th wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Lord Zim wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:-The Incursion nerf killed null & lo sec communities The incursion feature in and of itself helped kill null, lowsec and probably even WH populations. When incursions were nerfed, some of them probably moved back. DarthNefarius wrote:-What I really thing any HI SEC representative worth his salt should bring up is CCP Soundwaves comments in the Ten Ton Hammer interview propsing a 10% across the board cut in bounties which I don't recall CSM7discussing except maybe in the part where they were saying all EVE is space rich. See, this is exactly why I keep saying that a hisec rep would probably end up being bad for the game. "abloo bloo bloo they're going to reduce our payouts, FIX IT!", even if it's for the good of the game, and a very, very necessary move. Actually given the answers as to why something requiring such a small amount of resorces should not be done. Those being
- They are educated enough
- It would use resources
- 16.63% is good enough representation
The same arguments could be used for why Null sec should stay the stagnant heap it is now.
- It is fixed enough, any more would be pointless, especially as Null has shown several times that it does not want to be fixed.
- It would use a lot of resources
- 20.05% is good enough
You would like something fixed that would require a massive amount of resources that the majority of players do not want (If they wanted it they would vote for CSM reps from Null). If they were more educated in why null sec should be fixed more people might support the idea but you believe they are too educated now... As I have said before a minority CSM only means CCP can ignore it, the bigger the support the better the CSM we get and the more influence it will have. Jesus is this still going on, I tell you what next CSM elections I'll represent High-Sec, I've got plenty of experience which follows: A: I've flown in it a few times B: I have done a few missions C: I know it's quite large D: I will campaign for the people who don't want anyone to campaign for them. E: I have a large feeling of self-entitlement. Cool vote for me and worst case I'll guarantee to beat Martini in any drinking game (not an idle boast either) so after all is said and done High-Sec can say they beat 0.0 sec on one thing at least.
But you dont believe than non consensual PvP should be punishable by prison sentences... that's gonna be a big negative for you man, I dunno. Maybe if you hire Karl Rove as your campaign manager? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4517
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 13:10:00 -
[7] - Quote
See if you can dig up a few of her better "PvPers are sociopathic bullies" quotes. There were some real peaches. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4517
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 13:20:00 -
[8] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Tippia wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:The ones where you claim HI SEC is well represented by a bunch of NUL/LO/WH CSMs that populate CSM7, or the group of CSM6ers, etc to the original CSM1 GǪand I made that claim, where, exactly? My claim is that highsec doesn't particularly need special representation (and I've yet to see a good case being made for an issue where such representation is required). As for actual representation on the CSM, highsec is represented in CSM7; CSM5 was shock-full of them Sounds like we need some of those good old days back then for some more balanced representation. Past year of CSM dominated NULL SEC CSMs in my eyes appeared to be punctuated by a scandle & a riot
Can you think of some benefit to hisec that came out of CSM 5? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4517
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 13:36:00 -
[9] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote:Lord Zim wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:They understand it enough they've been playing it for a year and they represent it better because they are in the HI SEC trenches not fat space rich bittervets So what you want is Ankhesentapemkah, then? No, what would be a nice counter-balance is someone who was engaged and motivated and interested in a Hi-Sec that wasn't nefed into the ground.
Isn't Keldruum doing it for you? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4519
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 14:09:00 -
[10] - Quote
Tippia wrote:there doesn't seem to really be any highsec-specific issues
I disagree!
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4519
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 14:10:00 -
[11] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Tippia wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Well then the past 3 CSM's look to me to be one disaster after another. Not really. CSM6 was surprisingly disaster-free. What are you smoking CSM6 had the Incarna riots & the post fanfest resignation of its CSM Chair. CCP then proceded to boot him from CSM7. If that is disaster free the December 2005 tsunami was a kiddie pool splash wave Got any more lipstick to put on those pigs Tippia?
What had the Incarna riots to do with CSM6? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4519
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 14:20:00 -
[12] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Malcanis wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Tippia wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Well then the past 3 CSM's look to me to be one disaster after another. Not really. CSM6 was surprisingly disaster-free. What are you smoking CSM6 had the Incarna riots & the post fanfest resignation of its CSM Chair. CCP then proceded to boot him from CSM7. If that is disaster free the December 2005 tsunami was a kiddie pool splash wave Got any more lipstick to put on those pigs Tippia? What had the Incarna riots to do with CSM6? They were right smack in the middle of them Guilt by Association & proximaty I of courseblame the CSM's for all of CCP's bad PR that is what they are there for isn't it? CSM was created due to the T20 scandle wan't it?
All hi-seccers are icebots. Delete hi-sec! Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4519
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 14:21:00 -
[13] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Malcanis wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Tippia wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Well then the past 3 CSM's look to me to be one disaster after another. Not really. CSM6 was surprisingly disaster-free. What are you smoking CSM6 had the Incarna riots & the post fanfest resignation of its CSM Chair. CCP then proceded to boot him from CSM7. If that is disaster free the December 2005 tsunami was a kiddie pool splash wave Got any more lipstick to put on those pigs Tippia? What had the Incarna riots to do with CSM6? Well the PR clean-up included CSM 6.
The difference between a fireman and an arsonist may seem small... Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4520
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 14:55:00 -
[14] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Mortimer Civeri wrote:Frying Doom wrote: Just looks like your arse kissing.
At least I don't look like a conspiracy theory spouting nut-job. No apparently just a gullible fool then.
So which female CSM candidate do you plan to be a hugely creepy stalker of next election? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4521
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 19:28:00 -
[15] - Quote
If "hi-sec" wants their own CSM rep they only have to pull together a couple of thousand votes to get one. With "70%" of the ~360,000 eligible accounts based in hi-sec that means that 1 out of every 126 "hi-seccers" needs to spend the 30 seconds required.
Givevn that they haven't done so, one can only conclude that they either don't want to or they don't think of themselves as a monolithic, single-issue lumpenproletariat.
EDIT: apparently about 2400 votes are needed to be in the "go to Iceland" part of the CSM according to Trebor's blog. So let's say 1 in every 105 "hi-seccers". Such oppression when less than ONE PERCENT of this so-called consituency need to vote in order to secure themselves a top-7 CSM rep. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4522
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 20:15:00 -
[16] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Corina Jarr wrote:
The CSM isn't just there to propose fixes to broken stuff. They are also to help keep not broken stuff from being broken.
Oh and I thought CSM was to keep the TECH bottle neck firmly entrenched as long as possible while saying you want TECH to be nerfed. Therefore its to keep the broken parts in place as long as possible while it helps your true constituants
Like the majority of your "thoughts" about the CSM, this one is easily contradicted by the recorded facts. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4522
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 20:16:00 -
[17] - Quote
Calfis wrote:Lord Zim wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Oh and I thought CSM was to keep the TECH bottle neck firmly entrenched as long as possible while saying you want TECH to be nerfed. Therefore its to keep the broken parts in place as long as possible while it helps your true constituants You're either trolling, or literally ********. Look at his face, which do you think is more likely?
Poes Law... Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4525
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 21:10:00 -
[18] - Quote
DarthNefarius' increasingly agile evasions of inconvenient facts are extremely entertaining. One can only regret that dodging difficult questions isn't an olympic sport. Such glory denied... Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4527
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 14:13:00 -
[19] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote: The people in this thread whining about it could have been spending this time rallying high sec people to vote in the next election (ie adapting to the situation in order to overcome it), but true to form they come here griping about the unfairness of it so CCP itself will change it for them.
/thread
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4528
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 14:29:00 -
[20] - Quote
So why don't you make like a bee and buzz off and educate them? GSF's CSM campaign took responsibility for energising their constituency, so I don't see why you shouldn't stop wasting your time posting in this ridiculously overlong thread and emulate their highly successful example. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4534
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 18:46:00 -
[21] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Edit: Hell it would even be nice if your news arm carried an unbiased "Why you should Vote" article but again very unlikely. Write one. Come Voting time I will. Well I will write it in the mean time and submit it then anyway.
Why wait? This stuff doesn't work with a one-off article, however punchy, if your many, many posts in this thread are to be believed. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4534
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 18:49:00 -
[22] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Malcanis wrote:So why don't you make like a bee and buzz off and educate them? GSF's CSM campaign took responsibility for energising their constituency, so I don't see why you shouldn't stop wasting your time posting in this ridiculously overlong thread and emulate their highly successful example. Part of the education comes and exists from people reading the forums a small percentage I will admit but they are still their. As to you yourself as you have padded this thread so nicely, why are you not off educating people about the CSM or starting your own campaign? Oh and as I said it is to early for the masses.
I'm not the one with a hair up my ass about some fallacious sec-based lack of representation. You're unhappy with the status quo: you change it.
Obviously I'd be happier if more EVE players cared to vote, but I'm unconvinced that more of them will. Go prove me wrong. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4537
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 20:11:00 -
[23] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Malcanis wrote: Obviously I'd be happier if more EVE players cared to vote, but I'm unconvinced that more of them will. Go prove me wrong.
I doubt more of them will vote with the current popular vote election process TBH too. Was interesting that in the minutes CCP brought up the stake holder subject & the following was put out there too: "CCP Xhagen: My official stance on the voting system is that I don't think we can solve it here and now, but I do think we should commit to starting a thread on the internal forums and get the most basic ideas there, and then take it out to the public. (snip) CCP Xhagen: One other thing I want to make perfectly clear is that I don't want to commit to changing the voting system just to change it. I want to achieve something with the change." I think they were more concerned with the scammingof votes though if I got the gist of the timing of that conversation right. So sounds like an internal form thread may have been started in CCP I have not heard of anything brought out to the public. I think the addressing the appearce of an imbalance in the CSM would be a worthwile reason for a change in the current voting system & I recall adeadline of around Chrismas to makesuch a change was thrown out there in the whitepaper part of the minutes.
Yes yes yes, let's try explaining this once again:
If you reserve CSM seats for specific constituencies, then in essence you're pretty much handing those seats to whatever large, well-organised group cares to take them. This is because reserved seats will by definition have a smaller electorate, and policing that electorate to make sure that only "real" missioners/miners/whatever vote is virtually impossible. To do so would pretty much take a GM audit of every single voting account, which is an insane administrative burden to impose.
The current system is actually the least friendly to the large voting bloc. To get a CSM seat, any given constituency need only muster the 14th highest vote total out of those running. In reserved consituencies, fewer candidates will qualify, and only 1 can be elected. If 1 more goon alt than "real" hi-seccer votes for the reserved position, that's it: the goon candidate will own that seat. Whereas in the last election, those 10,000 goon votes only elected one candidate, leaving the other 13 seats open to be contested by other demographics.
It really does bear repeating: "hi-sec" isn't under-represented because "hi-seccers" are disbarred or discouraged or unable or too ignorant to vote. It's because very few credible candidates have run on a "hi-sec" platform. As it is, the current CSM has 2 out of 14 seats explicitly representing a hi-sec POV (Keldruum, Issler). That's actually pretty good, given that there are plenty of non-sec specific constituencies - small-gang PvP isn't sec specific, but why should it be less represented than "hi-sec"? Industry isn't sec-specific, but why should it be less represented than hi-sec? And so on.
In short, the fallacy is to assume that the only metric of a character's interests and opinions that counts is what sec area a character resides in. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4624
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 10:36:00 -
[24] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Personally I think we will see a lot more people running and voting, education or not, if they start nerfing Hi-sec.
It could even be argued that the fact that so few hi-sec residents have reason to be interested in the CSM is circumstantial evidence that hi-sec needs reworking Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
|
|