I'm glad to see the CSM has spent its time discussing issues that affect EVE as a whole, as opposed to immediately jumping down the line of "how can we make sure Mittens doesn't get elected to the #1 spot on the CSM for the third consecutive term?"

That said, I wholeheartedly support election reform as the opportunity for large blocs to "lock down" CSM seats is an issue that is only growing more obvious with time. If left unchecked, this will become increasingly destructive to the integrity and legitimacy of the Council as the CSM grows in influence and relevance.

Assuming for a moment that any large entity was capable of and succeeded in achieving 3/14 seats on CSM. This is over 20% of council representation. I think most players can understand that there might be something unfair about any group that holds less than 20% of the player population covering 20% of the council. Does anyone see any reason for that discrepancy to exist, or have an explanation as to how that discrepancy benefits the players?.

Assuming 350,000 subscribers Hans' votes (2,439) come from .7% of the player population. That's 7 tenths of 1 percent. Mittens' 10,058 votes represent approximately 3% of the player population.

What percentage of the player base does the CFC represent, and how does this proposal ensure that they receive less that that percentage of coverage on the CSM?

Ask Frying Doom about how to do this, he's been harping on and on about how this is the only solution.

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.

I don't even see this as "taking flak" , we're all adults here and I haven't heard any of you attacking Trebor as a person, only discussing some valid criticism about one proposal.

The issue I have with STV is that making voting *harder* isn't going to increase voter turnout numbers. Certainly the system Trebor proposed has some downsides, but one thing it does get right is that the voters wouldn't have to expend much more effort.

As someone who was elected from a smallish community, my worry is that in the future there might be 4 or 5 wormhole dudes running, and I don't want to see that mean that nobody from w-space gets elected. Avoiding that sort of scenario is my #1 requirement for a new voting system. My other desired features:

2) Encourage a broad representation on the CSM. Having a FW guy, or a wormhole guy, or a highsec guy on the CSM is really useful when we need a POV on issues that pertain to those communities.
3) Make voting easier, or at least as easy as it is currently.

How about this for an alternate proposal:

Run the election like true STV, but people pick a candidate and that candiate's list becomes their STV vote. It would also be nice to support people picking their own STV vote list, but that would take more dev time on CCP's part.

Why is disenfranchising a large portion of ANY organized voting bloc, whether it's Eve-U, the CFC, the HBC, or some future, not-yet-created bloc, okay. Answer that, it's the question you've been dancing around the whole ****ing thread.

Would prefer they do away with CSM and find some other way of creating a census with the userbase.

So I still haven't heard Hans justify how disenfranchising members of an organized bloc, whether it's the CFC or some other mythical group, is okay.

We're waiting, Hans.

You might try to think this out rather than screaming against it, this proposal by its self will do nothing to stop 10,000 votes from getting someone on the CSM. It would however reduce candidates like Darius III getting re-elected as he would have less chance of scamming another candidate out of their votes.

But the main problems facing the CSM are not even this they are more to do with re-activating old accounts (or making new ones) to vote and the lack of people who actually vote.

Frankly, I'd like to hear if The Mittani would have actually supported this STV initiative if he was still the CSM chairman, which your peers are trying to infer but as shying away from actually claiming. He can post, right?

To be honest, I'm VERY surprised at the number of Goonswarm posting that things should be kept exactly the same.

im referring to the previous 2 pages or so of people with Goon/TEST/CFC alliance tags saying keep things exactly the same.

3) Reduce (but not eliminate) the advantages held by highly organized voting blocs. In the previous election, 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'd rather see STV over FPTP. I don't buy the argument "Hurr it's hard to implement" - ideally the voting system should not be done by CCP at all but by a trusted third party with player and CCP oversight. I'm also not convinced that it's hard to provide accountability - If my country's government can provide me with raw vote data on election night, so can CCP.

I really don't want to see a system designed to lessen my influence because I happen to have friends, and I find it sickening that the that is the main design goal.

I know there's a substantial portion of the game that has beef with the ability of Goons and other 0.0 bloc to put candidates on the council in greater proportion than they "deserve."

So have it? One paragraph from an IDEA the OP used to start a conversation 20+ pages ago has you sperging out like crazy.

chiding everyone who disagrees with you isn't productive hth~

Name em?

There's tons of things wrong with the game. I'd like to know which of them we are "failing to address to CCP"

suply and demand

why the hell aint goons doing it ?

then if your takeing advantage of this dont complain and get more done before the fix come to stomp it out instead of argueing on the forums and being unproductive

EDIT: Just realized I'm trying to protect the voting power of players who don't want help of any kind. Enjoy Trebor.

Let's get writing that 'downfall' parody video now.

All this threadnought has accomplished has derailed any hope of public discussion and provided encouragement for CSM/CCP to figure things out ourselves. This despite several attempts from several different CSM, yes including me a bunch, to get the "OP says **** Goons" crowd to accept when they've made a good point successfully and let things move on so a better proposal than the initial one can be developed.

Protip: I campaign managed the CSM 6 and CSM 7 elections for DekCo/CFC bloc voting. This last cycle you could have taken the #3 and #4 totals and added them to any candidate *except* for #2 and we'd still have come in 1st.

Your fvckgoons proposal won't actually work because I'm smarter than your yaoiboi CSM rep. So let's start from there and decide if this is really a fight you want to have versus addressing some legit issues that might be more important to the overall player experience.

At the bottom, Darius III was effectively ghosting during CSM6 but literally scammed enough votes to push him past a proven but small candidate (Korvin). When CSM7 started i spent an inordinate amount of time on him (and issler) trying to get them to pretend they we people not pixels and work with the rest of us. Unfortunately that only half worked, and DIII has been doing jack **** and when he does say something it's usually counterproductive or insulting to the CSM, CCP, or both.

If i had to put it in one phrase, the single vote system applied to a 14-available-spot virtual election is not complex enough to accurately reflect voter preference or robust enough to protect that preference if their candidate of choice is disqualified.

Designing voting systems isn't my area of experience, I don't really have the technical understanding of the myriad of different voting systems others involved in this discussion do. Though I'm sure you'll nitpick at that answer, nitpick with that in mind.

Because we're one of the most educated and active communities of any online game 4 years into a unique experiment of democracy in a virtual world that has evolved massively since its inception. Yet we're still electing our delegates like we did when CCP first drafted the White Paper. We can do better, and we can figure out what's better for ourselves.