Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 34 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Haquer
Vorkuta Inc Goonswarm Federation
127
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:10:00 -
[31] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I just wanted to state, for the record, that I could give no ****'s whether a Goon is elected to a future CSM. They represent a large portion of the active, involved player base, and most people would agree that if they can muster the most votes for a candidate, they deserve to be on the council.
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.
If you note the title of the thread, it is a call for discussion. You know, where you bring ideas and share them and discuss their merits. I hope we can all keep this in mind before we continue down the rabbit hole of stupidity that is either "You just want to suppress Goon influence" or "you just want to make sure you all get re-elected".
We've been discussing how stupid it is and also wanting to know why you guys added things into the STV that didn't exist in it before. |
Groperson
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
46
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:10:00 -
[32] - Quote
I for one welcome our eternal triumvirate rather than our president for life :twisted: :smug: |
Sal Volatile
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:17:00 -
[33] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I just wanted to state, for the record, that I could give no ****'s whether a Goon is elected to a future CSM. They represent a large portion of the active, involved player base, and most people would agree that if they can muster the most votes for a candidate, they deserve to be on the council.
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.
If you note the title of the thread, it is a call for discussion. You know, where you bring ideas and share them and discuss their merits. I hope we can all keep this in mind before we continue down the rabbit hole of stupidity that is either "You just want to suppress Goon influence" or "you just want to make sure you all get re-elected".
But they have been discussing it, while current CSM members have been posting extremely defensively, like your post above. I think that's very telling.
I think it's very interesting that you've characterized posting and critiquing as "invading." It demonstrates that this is not a politically neutral idea, and that you are not interested in genuine criticism. |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
545
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:21:00 -
[34] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I just wanted to state, for the record, that I could give no ****'s whether a Goon is elected to a future CSM. They represent a large portion of the active, involved player base, and most people would agree that if they can muster the most votes for a candidate, they deserve to be on the council.
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.
If you note the title of the thread, it is a call for discussion. You know, where you bring ideas and share them and discuss their merits. I hope we can all keep this in mind before we continue down the rabbit hole of stupidity that is either "You just want to suppress Goon influence" or "you just want to make sure you all get re-elected".
Sure! Explain your reasoning on the overvote penalty then. For those who may not realize the implications of such. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Cabal |
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
212
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:23:00 -
[35] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I just wanted to state, for the record, that I could give no ****'s whether a Goon is elected to a future CSM. They represent a large portion of the active, involved player base, and most people would agree that if they can muster the most votes for a candidate, they deserve to be on the council.
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.
If you note the title of the thread, it is a call for discussion. You know, where you bring ideas and share them and discuss their merits. I hope we can all keep this in mind before we continue down the rabbit hole of stupidity that is either "You just want to suppress Goon influence" or "you just want to make sure you all get re-elected".
Perhaps you could comment on why this is a goal then?
Trebor Daehdoow wrote: 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.
As far as I know no serious electoral reform has ever had "reduce the impact of voter and candidate organisation", why are internet spaceship governments special? Surely organised candidates make better CSM members and organised voters are more likely to have a greater investment in the process and the game in general. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
756
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:27:00 -
[36] - Quote
"We are posting this idea as a call for discussion"
*people start a discussion on why the idea is bad*
"Grr why are people INVADING and TINFOILING this thread, we wanted a discussion" Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
serras bang
Lucien Coven
20
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:27:00 -
[37] - Quote
i got an idea why dont we do stv and when the loggin screen comes up so dose the ballot and all we have to do is click 3 names and send ?
if none of the three get through that you enter your votes are classed as null invoid and are lost from the system of votes.
to help this along there could be ts3 or something orginised for each candidate to chat with the people there going to focus on like a press conferance that everyone is invited to witch all of these can have an advert for at the login screen ? |
Firstly
Li3's Electric Cucumber Li3 Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:32:00 -
[38] - Quote
Wow! It's like you guys read my mind; I wrote a post about this a couple of days ago.
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.
That said, I don't agree that your current reform suggestions are consistent with the "keep it simple, stupid" paradigm you're trying to espouse. I DO agree that voting only for one member of a 14-seat council is counter-productive to achieving adequate representation of the citizens of New Eden, and would like the opportunity to support more than one candidate for election. As it was correctly stated, the current system often forces players to have to choose between their particular "voting issues" as to which they hold more dear. Consequently, the current election system does a poor job of representing even a single player, let alone the body politic.
Regardless, thank you for taking issue with the current system and refusing to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Despite the tinfoil already lining the walls of this thread, this is truly an important and relevant issue. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
756
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:32:00 -
[39] - Quote
serras bang wrote:i got an idea why dont we do stv and when the loggin screen comes up so dose the ballot and all we have to do is click 3 names and send ? Because those people who don't pay attention or vote now will just click the first three names they see (if you're talking about mandatory voting) or skip it to get into game (if not).
It solves nothing. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
serras bang
Lucien Coven
20
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:35:00 -
[40] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:serras bang wrote:i got an idea why dont we do stv and when the loggin screen comes up so dose the ballot and all we have to do is click 3 names and send ? Because those people who don't pay attention or vote now will just click the first three names they see (if you're talking about mandatory voting) or skip it to get into game (if not). It solves nothing.
there would be a no vot button but it would make more see it and maybe actualy have a look on the forums and see what is done if they dont wanna vote they will no longer have noone else to blame but themselves. also they may not actualy know the time of the election or that csm exists like some people i know already. |
|
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
218
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:35:00 -
[41] - Quote
Firstly wrote: 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.
True, also the ability of the Republican and Democrat parties in the US to "lock down" states is an issue we desperately need to solve. |
digi
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
103
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:35:00 -
[42] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I just wanted to state, for the record, that I could give no ****'s whether a Goon is elected to a future CSM. They represent a large portion of the active, involved player base, and most people would agree that if they can muster the most votes for a candidate, they deserve to be on the council.
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.
If you note the title of the thread, it is a call for discussion. You know, where you bring ideas and share them and discuss their merits. I hope we can all keep this in mind before we continue down the rabbit hole of stupidity that is either "You just want to suppress Goon influence" or "you just want to make sure you all get re-elected".
As a 2003 player, I sit here and wonder what exactly my CSM is doing. Why are you focusing on the election rather than the game itself? Your job is to represent the playerbase's interest for the game. This discussion is not in the player's interest. I won't say what I think it is but it has nothing to do with spaceships.
I will go as far as to say this: this year's CSM has been the most ineffective by far and if it were possible to issue a vote of no-confidence then you and your team would surely have it.
Go fix spaceships. Do your damn job. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4537
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:37:00 -
[43] - Quote
Firstly wrote: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.
Large organized groups of voters are less relevant because please leave |
serras bang
Lucien Coven
20
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:37:00 -
[44] - Quote
digi wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I just wanted to state, for the record, that I could give no ****'s whether a Goon is elected to a future CSM. They represent a large portion of the active, involved player base, and most people would agree that if they can muster the most votes for a candidate, they deserve to be on the council.
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.
If you note the title of the thread, it is a call for discussion. You know, where you bring ideas and share them and discuss their merits. I hope we can all keep this in mind before we continue down the rabbit hole of stupidity that is either "You just want to suppress Goon influence" or "you just want to make sure you all get re-elected".
As a 2003 player, I sit here and wonder what exactly my CSM is doing. Why are you focusing on the election rather than the game itself? Your job is to represent the playerbase's interest for the game. This discussion is not in the player's interest. I won't say what I think it is but it has nothing to do with spaceships. I will go as far as to say this: this year's CSM has been the most ineffective by far and if it were possible to issue a vote of no-confidence then you and your team would surely have it. Go fix spaceships. Do your damn job.
this descusion is in the players intrest if you have been reading the forum seing your such an old player you will relaise people are screaming out for reform
|
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
89
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:39:00 -
[45] - Quote
serras bang wrote: this descusion is in the players intrest if you have been reading the forum seing your such an old player you will relaise people are screaming out for reform
It's about twenty badposters who continually post out of outrage nobody recognizes their genius and elects them to the csm by acclaim. that's it. |
Firstly
Li3's Electric Cucumber Li3 Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:40:00 -
[46] - Quote
Yeep wrote:Firstly wrote: 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.
True, also the ability of the Republican and Democrat parties in the US to "lock down" states is an issue we desperately need to solve.
I agree with this as well. Both parties are exceedingly well organized, but host platforms that accurately represent only a very small percentage of the public.
But then again, this is a thread about spaceship politics. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2847
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:41:00 -
[47] - Quote
EvilweaselFinance wrote:Like STV has its merits. STV, with an addition that exists nowhere else that is specifically designed to diminish the voting power of specific groups with no explanation? that's when I start breaking out the tinfoil.
Like Robert said,
Quote:However, standard STV systems do not meet our first goal. Implementing classic STV would require significant work by CCP to update the system, would require extra effort by voters (which would tend to favor highly organized groups), and may not be publicly verifiable.
Therefore, perhaps a simpler system might achieve most of our goals. Consider, for example, Candidate-Designated Single Transferrable Vote.
In this system, voters vote for a single candidate, just as they do now. However, each candidate publicly states which other candidates they want their votes to be transferred to if they are eliminated from the election.
CD-STV, while not providing the full spectrum of choice that STV does, does meet all the goals. The amount of work CCP will have to do to implement it is small (listing the candidates' preferences on their profile and voting page), it is no more difficult to use than at present, and anyone can run the raw vote totals through an election simulator.
This is just one proposal, out of a hundred ways to approach this, and everyone is certainly welcome to disagree about whether or not it is an improvement over traditional STV systems. Robert's approach stems from his interest in keeping things simple.
Regarding the diminishing of voting power for specific voting blocs, this is an excellent question.
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.
Obviously here Robert is referring to the CFC. There's no need to pretend otherwise, unless I'm mistaken they are the only bloc that engaged in highly sophisticated exit-polling. And no attempt at electoral reform should never be directed at any one specific voting bloc in particular, but the bottom line is that if Goonswarm didn't exist there would be some other group in the pole position, and the issue would still exist. This is why I say there is no reason for the Goons to take this so personally, this just happens to be an issue that affects any alliance or group in the game with the largest member-base.
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?
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. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
digi
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
103
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:42:00 -
[48] - Quote
serras bang wrote:digi wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I just wanted to state, for the record, that I could give no ****'s whether a Goon is elected to a future CSM. They represent a large portion of the active, involved player base, and most people would agree that if they can muster the most votes for a candidate, they deserve to be on the council.
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.
If you note the title of the thread, it is a call for discussion. You know, where you bring ideas and share them and discuss their merits. I hope we can all keep this in mind before we continue down the rabbit hole of stupidity that is either "You just want to suppress Goon influence" or "you just want to make sure you all get re-elected".
As a 2003 player, I sit here and wonder what exactly my CSM is doing. Why are you focusing on the election rather than the game itself? Your job is to represent the playerbase's interest for the game. This discussion is not in the player's interest. I won't say what I think it is but it has nothing to do with spaceships. I will go as far as to say this: this year's CSM has been the most ineffective by far and if it were possible to issue a vote of no-confidence then you and your team would surely have it. Go fix spaceships. Do your damn job. this descusion is in the players intrest if you have been reading the forum seing your such an old player you will relaise people are screaming out for reform
I'm going to assume that your English is poor. That's fine, I translated.
If people are screaming for reform then remember this: YOU elected the current CSM. Compare last year's CSM with the current group and you will see clearly where the reform needs to be. Things got done last year. Changes were made, the entire playerbase had a say. This year? What has the CSM done?
I thought Hans was a pretty standup guy and I would be the first to admit that his platform held a lot of merit but he has proved no better than the rest. Bird of a feather, I guess.
If you want reform, vote for people that will do their job and keep CCP on task. It's quite simple.
|
Lord Zim
1321
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:44:00 -
[49] - Quote
So in other words, this CSM is doing exactly the same as CCP has been doing the last few years, i.e. look upon a "problem", then spend months contemplating a solution, and then coming up with a solution which makes the problem worse because it can be gamed even harder.
:golfclap: |
serras bang
Lucien Coven
20
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:46:00 -
[50] - Quote
talking to me no im dyslexic if your not then fine and i usualy dont vote like rl im not really all that into politics. but this year ive decided to try and see :P |
|
Sal Volatile
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:46:00 -
[51] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: Obviously here Trebor is referring to the CFC. There's no need to pretend otherwise, unless I'm mistaken they are the only bloc that engaged in highly sophisticated exit-polling. And no attempt at electoral reform should never be directed at any one specific voting bloc in particular, but the bottom line is that if Goonswarm didn't exist there would be some other group in the pole position, and the issue would still exist. This is why I say there is no reason for the Goons to take this so personally, this just happens to be an issue that affects any alliance or group in the game with the largest member-base.
Deliberate mischaracterization of the other side's point of view is an extremely dishonest form of discourse. Shame on you. What is the difference between "taking an interest" and "taking it personally" other than where you sit in terms of the other side's point of view? There is none. It's all about how you want to (mis-)characterize those with whom you disagree. Facing this level of intellectual dishonesty, it's natural to start questioning the motives of those engaging in it.
|
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
97
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:46:00 -
[52] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:EvilweaselFinance wrote:Like STV has its merits. STV, with an addition that exists nowhere else that is specifically designed to diminish the voting power of specific groups with no explanation? that's when I start breaking out the tinfoil. Like Trebor said, What you've done here is admit exactly what we've been charging: this is not an attempt to make a "fair" system. This is an attempt to specifically bias the system against the CFC.
The deliberate change to STV to throw out overvotes doesn't simplify anything. It's merely an attempt to bias the system in a way that's unjustifiable and can't stand up to the light of scrutiny: hence your outrage that goons would "invade" this thread pointing it out because it's indefensible so all you can do is try to shut the discussion down.
The change that's clear electoral tampering isn't candidate-selected STV: it's throwing out overvotes. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
762
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:46:00 -
[53] - Quote
Its disappointing, but not surprising, to see the CSM members have been so effectively played by a handful of alts shrieking incessantly about 'lack of representation' at every opportunity because they're incapable of rallying support or enthusiasm for their terrible candidates, and creating enough noise to give the impression that they represent anything more than that.
This is irrelevant navel-gazing of CSM1-era proportions. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
97
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:48:00 -
[54] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: Obviously here Trebor is referring to the CFC. There's no need to pretend otherwise, unless I'm mistaken they are the only bloc that engaged in highly sophisticated exit-polling. And no attempt at electoral reform should never be directed at any one specific voting bloc in particular, but the bottom line is that if Goonswarm didn't exist there would be some other group in the pole position, and the issue would still exist. This is why I say there is no reason for the Goons to take this so personally, this just happens to be an issue that affects any alliance or group in the game with the largest member-base.
"we are deliberately biasing this system against the CFC, but the CFC shouldn't take it personally because we would try to bias the system against anyone who threatens our political power"
yeah uh that's not a great defense there |
serras bang
Lucien Coven
20
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:48:00 -
[55] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Its disappointing, but not surprising, to see the CSM members have been so effectively played by a handful of alts shrieking incessantly about 'lack of representation' at every opportunity because they're incapable of rallying support or enthusiasm for their terrible candidates, and creating enough noise to give the impression that they represent anything more than that.
This is irrelevant navel-gazing of CSM1-era proportions.
tbh this isnt the problem go ask 100 random player in hi sec eve what csm is and half of em prolly wont have a clue. |
Alchenar
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:48:00 -
[56] - 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? |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2848
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:50:00 -
[57] - Quote
Sal Volatile wrote: I think it's very interesting that you've characterized posting and critiquing as "invading." It demonstrates that this is not a politically neutral idea, and that you are not interested in genuine criticism.
You're absolutely right. Invading was a poor choice of words, it implies that Goons don't have a right to be here. Thank you for pointing this out as it was not my intention. I was commenting more on the speed and force with which they responded.
Every player has a stake in how the elections are reformed, and is welcome to speak up about this.
I appreciate you holding me accountable, Sal.
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Pheniox Nugs
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:52:00 -
[58] - Quote
http://i.imgur.com/LOGcG.gif |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2848
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:52:00 -
[59] - Quote
Alchenar wrote: 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?
I'd say the chance of that correlation existing is extremely high.
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
221
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 15:53:00 -
[60] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: This is just one proposal, out of a hundred ways to approach this, and everyone is certainly welcome to disagree about whether or not it is an improvement over traditional STV systems. Trebor's approach stems from his interest in keeping things simple.
A google search for "Candidate-Designated Single Transferrable Vote" returns this 5 hour old thread on the front page. Voting reform is quite a hot topic in a number of countries at the moment but you guys are the only people to even suggest something like this. Either you're smarter than every single politically minded person in the world or your idea is so stupid it was dismissed almost immediately in every serious discussion.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: 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?
Every single member of the current CSM holds a higher percentage of the council seats than their percentage of players because of the abysmal voter turnout. These changes do nothing to alter that (and potentially make things worse due to being confusing as **** and throwing away votes needlessly). You're also assuming that a block of voters is putting forwards multiple candidates just for ***** and giggles rather than having a number of specialists they feel would meaningfully contribute to the CSM. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 34 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |