Cass Lie
State War Academy
Caldari State
36
   |
Posted - 2012.09.10 11:04:00 -
[1] - Quote
Serious proposal incoming.
Let me start off by saying that I think the current system is fine and the best way to "improve" it is to increase voter participation.
With that out of the way, let's look at the CSM arguments for changing the system.
First: 25% of votes getting lost. I personally don't see this as a problem in itself.
Second: If two strong candidates from a certain playstyle are running, say for wh, fw or incursions, chances are neither will be elected. I can see how that could be a problem, for instance when you get a null/empire centric CSM, which typically doesn't have much experience with wormholes and isn't thus much use to CCP on this topic. And I hope being a better use to CCP is what this CSM wants to achieve.
OK, with that premise, the original proposal makes some sense, but there are fears of the system being overly complicated and prone to gaming. So what if there was only one person the unsuccessful candidate could transfer votes to and not the whole amount was transferred but only a half (for example). Determination of the results would stay the same as in the original proposal. That way a voter would still lose something for voting for an unsuccessful candidate, but it would hopefully somewhat mitigate the second problem mentioned above. If there were three strong candidates running and couldn't agree on a single person to eventually push through, that would be their fault and their voters. High sec could also get a strong vote if all the small candidates running could agree on a few strong candidates who would eventually make it.
Gaming the system would be somewhat harder and if all the various high sec candidates ended up listing as their candidate a goon alt, well tough luck, at least he campaigned well and is supposedly not ignorant.
This way a vote for unsuccessful candidate can be worth half a vote, while an excess vote for an overly successful candidate is basically lost - you can try similar mechanism for transfering overvotes, but here I am not sure if it would not be overcomplicating things and prone to further gaming.
This whole designing voting system business is dubious anyways, since the purpose and the power of the CSM is vaguely defined. Goons/nullsec wouldn't much "benefit" for getting 80% of seats since there is no voting mechanic, same as someone won't benefit from getting 3000 more votes than was actually needed, since there is no formal power derived from that.
|