|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
4605
   |
Posted - 2012.09.13 10:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
Revolution Rising wrote:Sinead Arzi wrote:Sadly the Irish political voting system is based on STV
what it results in is more n more clowns getting in to government because of STV and look at the state of the irish economy :(.
STV sucks
in eve STV would just see more n more clowns getting into CSM.
As opposed to the current... oh nevermind...
The trouble with freedom and democracy is that people don't always do what you think they ought to or vote for who you think would be best.
I suggest that the classical solution, which is to ~Deal with it~, is still the best.
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.
4961
|
Posted - 2012.10.24 07:59:00 -
[2] - Quote
How about people just accept that there are no barriers whatsoever to voting, and pretty trivial barriers to entering the race, and consequently the result we get is the result that's desired by people who actually spend the 30 damb seconds required to vote, even if you personally think that result "isn't representative" of this sec or that sec or underpants gnomes?
In CSM 7, a prospective candidate needed less than 1% of the eligible votes to get elected to the CSM. If you can't get even one percent of the electorate to briefly twitch a finger in order to vote for you, then you might need to consider that, no matter how much you clothe yourself in the colors of "hi-sec" or "miners" or whatever else bandwagon you jumped on, you're simply not a candidate that people want representing them all that much.
Sorry if this fact hurts your precious e-feelings, but all the crying in the world for CCP to make it so that everyone wins and gets a prize won't change it.
MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
4973
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 06:46:00 -
[3] - Quote
Mikaila Penshar wrote:Malcanis wrote:How about people just accept that there are no barriers whatsoever to voting, and pretty trivial barriers to entering the race, and consequently the result we get is the result that's desired by people who actually spend the 30 damb seconds required to vote, even if you personally think that result "isn't representative" of this sec or that sec or underpants gnomes?
In CSM 7, a prospective candidate needed less than 1% of the eligible votes to get elected to the CSM. If you can't get even one percent of the electorate to briefly twitch a finger in order to vote for you, then you might need to consider that, no matter how much you clothe yourself in the colors of "hi-sec" or "miners" or whatever else bandwagon you jumped on, you're simply not a candidate that people want representing them all that much.
Sorry if this fact hurts your precious e-feelings, but all the crying in the world for CCP to make it so that everyone wins and gets a prize won't change it. lotsawerdz... thanks for adding to the discussion? Um, this thread is a place to kick around ideas for revamping the election process, right? What did you add to this discussion... exactly nothing but lotsawerdz... the Fail is strong with you Malcanis
My "idea" is that the current system is already pretty good, with it's only failing that it doesnt produce the results that some people feel they're entitled to.
MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
4974
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 13:10:00 -
[4] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote: the top 10 Alliances in Eve
Defined by what metric? Members? Sov systems? Killboard stats? NPCs killed? How blue they are to me?
How about we just let players choose who they want to represent them by a free and anonymous vote, and make it so there's enough representative positions that even fairly small minorities can be represented if they're sufficiently motivated.
Well, job done!
MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
4978
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 14:57:00 -
[5] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Malcanis wrote:Prince Kobol wrote: the top 10 Alliances in Eve Defined by what metric? Members? Sov systems? Killboard stats? NPCs killed? How blue they are to me? Make the metrics for CSM memberships the number of macks and orcas killed. It'll be awesome during election months.
Your transparent attempt to disenfranchise the freighter ganking community has fooled no-one. Why do you hate democracy so much?
MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
4992
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 20:15:00 -
[6] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:Mikaila Penshar wrote:What about 'representational votes' , a sort of electoral college if you will... basing your vote's weight on the main sp toon of an account and where it is based out of.
High-Sec
Low-Sec
Null-Sec
Worm Hole
There has to be some mathematical equation to equalize votes for sectors of space that have fewer people in them and thus less representation. Just guessing here but if high sec has the most active accounts followed by null then low then wh space
again just an example:
High sec votes count at 1: 0.5
Null sec votes at 1: 0.75
Low sec votes at 1: 1
Worm Hole votes at 1: 1.25
So you're saying nullsec (and ls / whs) need more representation than they have? The highsec bears are going to love that idea lol
I certainly wouldn't put both my mains into a wormhole then cast my vote
MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
5161
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 19:56:00 -
[7] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Because it acting like a Null sec lobby is not doing much for the CSM its self and really is minimalising its role and usefulness to the community.
Although it has managed to achieve in areas where it is has some members like mining and FW these are not the areas that the CSM as a whole push. So if it wishes to be a community representative it needs to act like one not just a Null lobby with some rouge agents that manage to get things done. From my POV, this CSM has been fairly limpwristed, and I don't put that down to where people in it come from, more how little they seem to be pushing CCP to fixing the right things. How much of that is reality and how much of that is just the fact they haven't been as effective in communicating what they do to the playerbase, remains to be seen. Issler
Zim, you forgot to switch characters.
MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
5284
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 14:09:00 -
[8] - Quote
BYRAN BRASSBALLS wrote:Sorry, but just kill the CSM. Let CCP send out up and down votes via cash playing players. It stop the silly stuff. ( I respect the CSM, I just think it is system that cannot work. )
How do you get the players to up and downvote each individual issue?
What makes you think that the process would achieve better average representation than asking them to just vote 1x a year?
How do you handle public voting on issues that have to stay confidential?
How exactly does the current system not work?
MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
5284
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 15:25:00 -
[9] - Quote
Ruareve wrote:This was the first year I voted for CSM and I really didn't like the way it was arranged. I think a better system would be to have specific interest slots and have people run for those areas. So null sec gets one slot, high one, low one, industry, faction warfare, mercenary.... whatever areas of the game that need to be included which is probably the most difficult part to narrow down.
Each player gets to vote for one third of the total number of slots. Whether they put all their votes on one candidate or spread them out is up to the player. In the end the candidates have to choose which area of the game they want to represent and the players should feel like their vote counted towards the areas they want to see improvements.
It has been repeatedly proven that this will hav the exact opposite effect that you intend, essentially you'll just hand all of the CSM to the largest voting bloc, rather than just a couple.
The current system is actually the most favourable for minority interests.
MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
|
|
| |
|