It was talked about as "a problem" at the CSM meet in may/june. The CSM came up with this abortion of a suggestion, birthed out of the abortion of a set of minimum requirements, 3 months later.

You've spent 3 months on this.

AS AN ASIDE: Someone threw out the idea of each voter getting a "vote against" vote in addition to picking their preferred candidate. What do you guys think of that? Sounds very EVE-like.

I suggested that last year. As was shown to me, that is exceptionally game-able. Seleene and Two Step could kiss any future CSM goodbye were that implemented.

To be honest, I'm VERY surprised at the number of Goonswarm posting that things should be kept exactly the same. You want to talk disenfranchisement, the over 10,000 votes for TheMitanni got thrown out because of his banning after he got elected. Are you guys sure you think NOTHING needs to be changed?

To be honest, I'm VERY surprised at the number of Goonswarm posting that things should be kept exactly the same. You want to talk disenfranchisement, the over 10,000 votes for TheMitanni got thrown out because of his banning after he got elected. Are you guys sure you think NOTHING needs to be changed?

I'll be real honest, designing voting systems is not my area of expertise. I supported this thread being started because, as Seleene said, this was a conversation that NEEDED to happen and I thought it would be better to lead with an idea to start things off. Mostly, I was looking forward to the discussion. Shooting holes in the original proposal has happened, but not a lot of constructive talk about what to do instead aside from keep things as is.

I dont think the system as-is does the job as well as it should. Players legit worry about giving their vote to a small candidate not because he or she doesn't match their views but because they feel their vote would be wasted. The system has no way of dealing with what happens when a successfully elected candidate becomes disqualified (banned, dead, whatever) before he or she takes office.

Building voting systems isnt my thing. The "best" system i can think of is a ranked preferences thing where you pick your top up to 14 candidates in order and they get "point" on that rank. Most points wins first place, second most second etc. But that assumes people will know enough about 40+ players running for CSM to be able to sort out preferences like that which isn't really realistic. And even if it was, it would make voting more complicated/time consuming and voter turnout is already an issue.

So we cant have a system I'd consider perfect, but the current one isn't good enough. We have a very intelligent player community including large groups of players who love to game/break systems (CFC comes to mind but they're not alone by any means) so let's talk about what the solution should be.

AS AN ASIDE: Someone threw out the idea of each voter getting a "vote against" vote in addition to picking their preferred candidate. What do you guys think of that? Sounds very EVE-like..

ALSO AS AN ASIDE: Having people pidegon holed into particular activities or areas of residence works in the real world but does not translate into a virtual environment like EVE. Characters can move all over and nothing stops a player who PVPs all weekend from doing mining and manufacturing during the weekdays. BUT thinning down the number of people running is a good idea. Instead of doing this by forum likes (which are overly easy to get), what about a round of 1 account/1 vote pre-vote/primary vote? Any other ideas?

You are my favorite poster in this thread because you know exactly what is going on and don't hesitate to let the people know.

What does The Mittani's resignation have to do with the voting process? Nothing at all, in case you were wondering.

Don't drop oranges into the apple cart, please.

What does The Mittani's resignation have to do with the voting process? Nothing at all, in case you were wondering.

Don't drop oranges into the apple cart, please.

CSM Chairman treating us to some more b-grade shitposts.
Asking him some questions usually sends him scurrying off.

We put all of two candidates on the council in CSM 6.

Perhaps that "substantial" portion of the game (more likely a bunch of sockpuppets but whatever) should focus their time on getting more people to vote rather than trying to diminish the influence of a motivated 0.0 voting bloc.

Poetic Stanziel: Happy CCP threw out 10,000 votes.

I don't think all the trolling in the thread by the CSM is helping their case.

How does CD-"STV" stop CCP from dismissing someone after the election results have been announced?

No, I tend to answer things I'm asked. That you don't like or believe the answers is something I have no control over.

Guarantee you i didnt spend 3 months on that rofl.

Poetic Stanziel: Happy CCP threw out 10,000 votes.

Poetic Stanziel: Happy CCP threw out 10,000 votes.

No, I tend to answer things I'm asked. That you don't like or believe the answers is something I have no control over.

Ok, here's a question! When you guys came up with this "**** goons" voting system, did you do it because you thought it'd rouse the totally-real-and-not-at-all-made-up Silent Pubbie Majority into voting for you, or did you do it because you really just have a problem with goon candidates in and of themselves?

I don't think all the trolling in the thread by the CSM is helping their case.

How does CD-"STV" stop CCP from dismissing someone after the election results have been announced?

Disappointing. The CSM is good at typing out their own opinions, communicating those opinions to us ... very bad as discussing their opinions.

bye seleene....

In the most recent election, for example, almost 25% of the votes were cast for candidates who did not win election to the CSM.

bye seleene....

Why are you quoting me with that question? I already said I don't think it does in two posts.

There does need to be an acceptable way to deal with that circumstance though, the Mitanni's case should not be repeated. If it's not on the candidate end, something on the voter end then. Perhaps an "emergency preference" where your vote would go to that second guy if and only if your first choice was somehow incapacitated?

Throwing out ideas for the handful of people reading/replying constructively.

I have to say, I admire how Darius III's commitment to not contributing to the CSM at all is so thorough he's even passing up an opportunity to troll goons.

No, I tend to answer things I'm asked. That you don't like or believe the answers is something I have no control over.