| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Alchenar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
5
   |
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:48:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:And the more important question is - what is the significance of obtaining more than one seat on the council, per large entity, in the first place? This would have to assume that the CSM uses a voting system internally to determine policy, or that CCP somehow gives an idea more weight if 2-3 CSM members agree as supposed to only one. My experience has shown so far though that even a single CSM seat can make more of a difference than three others in terms of influence, as long as that seat is filled by someone competent, articulate, and who makes good suggestions.
Hey guys what if there was a correlation between being in the leadership of the most successful and largest coalition in the game and being competent, articulate and making good suggestions? |
Alchenar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen: "The CSM voting system should be weighted to produce members who are smart, articulate and make good suggestiong because that's what makes CCP listen"
"CCP don't listen to any of my ideas and that's why I haven't got anything done"
|
Alchenar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:50:00 -
[3] - Quote
Tippia wrote:The reason STV is GÇ£the better systemGÇ¥ is exactly because it is complicated. You can't have it both ways.
.
This isn't STV. It's STV with a special addon specifically designed to disenfranchise voters.
People aren't complaining that it's complicated. They are complaining that the proposal is deliberately designed to be undemocratic. |
Alchenar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
13
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:43:00 -
[4] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Poetic Stanziel wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Despite the hilarity of the Goons instantly invading the thread assuming that this is all somehow directed at them, that doesn't change the fact that players have been, for many elections now, frustrated with the electoral process and expressed desire to iterate upon it. No offense, but why wouldn't they assume this is directed at them when Trebor makes mention of them twice as reasons that the voting system has to change? Quote:. . . some candidates have increasingly overwhelming information and organizational advantages, threatens to effectively disenfranchise a significant portion of the electorate. Quote:. . . for example, one voting bloc did extremely sophisticated exit-polling; if they had chosen to use this information to efficiently split their votes, they could have won 3 of the top 7 positions on the CSM. I asked why they felt it targeted the CFC in particular and not "whichever group in the game has the most organized power". In other words, if your worst nightmare came true and Kelduum metagamed EVE University into the largest, most organized player entity in the game, how would Trebor's proposal treat EVE Uni any different than the CFC?
I'm going to write a law that says 'All people called Hans Jagerblitzen must be killed on sight'.
Sure, you happen to be the only person effected by this law but it isn't targetted at you because some other person could change their name to Hans Jagerblitzen. |
| |
|