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) |
Sal Volatile
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:16:00 -
[91] - Quote
Why do people think there isn't dissent within large coalitions?
Why are voters who choose popular candidates less worthy of representation than those who choose unpopular candidates?
How is this proposal anything other than dehumanizing to some voters, by making their votes worth less than others? |
Aryndel Vyst
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
424
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:17:00 -
[92] - Quote
I am extremely glad that the CSM is tackling hard hitting topics like "How can my pubsec friend nobody's heard of get more votes without people actually voting for them". |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
198
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:18:00 -
[93] - Quote
don't disenfranchise me bro This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
fofofo |
Ted McManfist
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:19:00 -
[94] - Quote
How is "One vote per account" a system that needs changing? Unless, of course, you only seek to remain in power and are looking for a way to manipulate votes to that end.
If hi-sec dwellers feel they aren't being represented, then they have the same opportunity as the rest of us to select a candidate that best represents their interests and rally behind them.
If they are disinterested, disorganized, or just too stupid to do that...tough. Why should the rest of us be marginalized because of inept publourdes? |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
769
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:20:00 -
[95] - Quote
serras bang wrote:David Carel wrote:serras bang wrote:David Carel wrote:serras bang wrote:well heres another thought to represent the player base a little better how about only allowing one candidate from each alliance. Alt alliances, been there; done that. lol to bad i still win :P What? alt alliances ect would also be taken into acount for this i aint that stupid to make a suggestion just to allow players to skip alliance at ellection time to another alliance to get in. So you're saying that, for an elected body intended partly to hold CCP accountable to its playerbase, that CCP (Or someone else? Who?) should be able to arbitrarily rule particular candidates illegible because they are part of an "alt alliance"?
And you seriously don't instantly see the gaping cavernous hole in that argument? 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. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2849
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:20:00 -
[96] - Quote
EvilweaselFinance wrote:You've found that to be unacceptable
I haven't found anything unacceptable. Trebor wrote the proposal, I'm just here to discuss its merits and drawbacks just like the rest of you. The whole point is to allow the community to shape a set of recommendations that we can take to CCP. It may be that the recommendation we get from the community is that we change nothing at all.
I'm pretty open-minded in general. If you don't like something Trebor said, convince me that its bad. I'm listening. There's no need to argue in the meantime as if this was something every one of the CSM members is personally trying to mandate.
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Alchenar
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:21:00 -
[97] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen: "The CSM voting system should be weighted to produce members who are smart, articulate and make good suggestiong because that's what makes CCP listen"
"CCP don't listen to any of my ideas and that's why I haven't got anything done"
|
Lord Zim
1323
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:22:00 -
[98] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:What does the farmability of FW have to do with any of this? I specifically asked about the market price determination formula long before Inferno's release and many of us on the CSM warned them about the likelihood of this being abused. Surely it doesn't suprise you that CCP doesn't always take the CSM's advice. Actually, I'll just spell it out for you:
CCP has, the last year or three, been known to release game mechanics which have been gameable as all hell, chief amongst has been FW and, say, the wardec system.
Everybody told CCP that the wardec ally system was going to get dogpiled, they still implemented it. A lot of people told CCP that linking LP rewards to things which people could affect would be exploited, CCP still implemented it. FW LP generation is now farmville central, and I'm sure we'll see people telling CCP about this as well before FW was released, but I can't be arsed to search the forums for bad posts. Most of these things were identified and plans for their exploitation was cooked up within a very short timeframe.
Compare this to you guys' idea of a "voting reform", and it's CCP quality all over again, i.e. we'd shot huge holes in it within 15 minutes because of one minor detail which you guys (apparently deliberately, with a very, very specific purpose it now seems) put in there. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
106
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:23:00 -
[99] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I'm pretty open-minded in general. If you don't like something Trebor said, convince me that its bad. I'm listening. There's no need to argue in the meantime as if this was something every one of the CSM members is personally trying to mandate.
It's bad because it has a rule that exists for no other reason except to throw out the votes of a specific group. That, alone, is enough. What is your position on disenfranchising voters? |
serras bang
Lucien Coven
21
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:23:00 -
[100] - Quote
Ted McManfist wrote:How is "One vote per account" a system that needs changing? Unless, of course, you only seek to remain in power and are looking for a way to manipulate votes to that end.
If hi-sec dwellers feel they aren't being represented, then they have the same opportunity as the rest of us to select a candidate that best represents their interests and rally behind them.
If they are disinterested, disorganized, or just too stupid to do that...tough. Why should the rest of us be marginalized because of inept publourdes?
the descusion aint about goons lets keeps on subject the descusion how to broadly make it fair but i say again a lot and i mean a lot of hi sec players do not know of csm. and i made a few suggestions further up up seams to have been over ridden by goons complaining (i wasnt gonna stoop to this but there it is).
but seriously even if this dosent get changed i think really what needs done is csm to be shoved out into the limelite on loggin and give the player to vote durring loggin pluss as i said other things of kinda a confrance for player to meet the people running for csm. |
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2849
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:25:00 -
[101] - Quote
Aryth wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:EvilweaselFinance wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: No, what I said was that Trebor's proposal biases the system against the single most powerful voting bloc achieving higher-than proportional representation on the council.
Trebor's proposal is to ensure that voting blocks achieve lower-than-proportional representation. It's not intended to ensure we have a fair amount of representation: it is an attempt to make sure we have an unfairly low amount. 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? Wrong question. The better question is, what percentage of the VOTING player base does CFC represent. I would say we are well under represented when we only elected a single person.
Good point. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Lord Zim
1324
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:26:00 -
[102] - Quote
serras bang wrote:the descusion aint about goons lets keeps on subject the descusion how to broadly make it fair The "discussion" is about one very, very specific part of the suggestion, i.e. the part which basically throws votes out the window for no good reason. |
RDevz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
113
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:27:00 -
[103] - Quote
serras bang wrote: the descusion aint about goons lets keeps on subject the descusion how to broadly make it fair but i say again a lot and i mean a lot of hi sec players do not know of csm. and i made a few suggestions further up up seams to have been over ridden by goons complaining (i wasnt gonna stoop to this but there it is).
Since when has "pointing out the holes in your logic so large it could comfortably accommodate a space shuttle" been "complaining"?
~ |
serras bang
Lucien Coven
21
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:28:00 -
[104] - Quote
and dose a player need more than 10% of votes ? unless desiding on a tie for head of csm ? |
HVAC Repairman
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
207
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:28:00 -
[105] - Quote
you're going to regret making this thread when we elect arghy as csm8 chair Follow me on twitter |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Ascendance.
374
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:29:00 -
[106] - Quote
The issue is finding a way to easily see why a person has selected another person to get there votes and see if they are gaming the system.
Voting blocks have been talked about alot how about identify voting block and not another person. The person with highest number of votes and selecting that block gets the marginailized votes. There is more transperancy this way. |
Lord Zim
1324
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:29:00 -
[107] - Quote
serras bang wrote:and dose a player need more than 10% of votes ? unless desiding on a tie for head of csm ? What does this have to do with anything? |
Haquer
Vorkuta Inc Goonswarm Federation
130
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:30:00 -
[108] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Good point. Good point. I can understand how that would be frustrating.
Know what else is frustrating? You skirting every post asking you why disenfranchising voters is a good idea.
E: Heh, nice edit dude |
serras bang
Lucien Coven
21
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:32:00 -
[109] - Quote
to get on csm i doubt that a player rarely needs even 5% of all total votes on the bassis of 20 people running for csm
|
Lord Zim
1324
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:33:00 -
[110] - Quote
serras bang wrote:to get on csm i doubt that a player rarely needs even 5% of all total votes on the bassis of 20 people running for csm Waiting for a point here. |
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2849
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:33:00 -
[111] - Quote
Haquer wrote:Know what else is frustrating? You skirting every post asking you why disenfranchising voters is a good idea.
I didn't realize that I said that disenfranchising voters was a good idea.... Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
serras bang
Lucien Coven
21
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:34:00 -
[112] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:serras bang wrote:to get on csm i doubt that a player rarely needs even 5% of all total votes on the bassis of 20 people running for csm Waiting for a point here.
point is even with missing vote from large alliances such as goons if there as popular as they say then they will still easily make the top position without diminishing there stake. (sorry goons for makeing you the example here). |
Lord Zim
1324
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:35:00 -
[113] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Haquer wrote:Know what else is frustrating? You skirting every post asking you why disenfranchising voters is a good idea.
I didn't realize that I said that disenfranchising voters was a good idea.... Were you against this suggestion? How many months have you guys spent on drafting this? Did you guys really think it wasn't gameable? |
Haquer
Vorkuta Inc Goonswarm Federation
130
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:35:00 -
[114] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Haquer wrote:Know what else is frustrating? You skirting every post asking you why disenfranchising voters is a good idea.
I didn't realize that I said that disenfranchising voters was a good idea....
You as in the collective "you" of the CSM.
Stop politicking and either stop defending this **** like you have for the past 5 pages, or get the **** out and make Trebor and Seleene defend it, as they're the ones who obvious support this hilariously stupid suggestion. |
Haquer
Vorkuta Inc Goonswarm Federation
134
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:37:00 -
[115] - Quote
Now I eagerly await Hans coming back stating that he doesn't represent the CSM as a whole.
Don't let me down, Hans. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
108
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:37:00 -
[116] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Haquer wrote:Know what else is frustrating? You skirting every post asking you why disenfranchising voters is a good idea.
I didn't realize that I said that disenfranchising voters was a good idea.... Is it a bad idea or a bad thing? |
Aryndel Vyst
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
424
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:39:00 -
[117] - Quote
I have a proposal: How about we let accounts vote for the person they want to, the end? Then, and here's the kicker, at the end of the voting period we count the votes, now bear with me here, and we decide the winners based on who got the most votes.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2849
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:39:00 -
[118] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote: Were you against this suggestion? How many months have you guys spent on drafting this? Did you guys really think it wasn't gameable?
We've had some brief internal discussion about it, but the bottom line is that it is inappropriate for the CSM to decide for itself, what the next election rules should be. It would be unethical for us to have some month-long pow wow, decide what we think is best, and than try to push that agenda on the public.
This is exactly why Trebor put out an idea that he's put some time and energy into, as a starting point for discussion, not a formal proposal we want double checked before we push it on CCP. As for myself being for or against this particular proposal? That depends on what I learn from the public discussion in this thread.
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Haquer
Vorkuta Inc Goonswarm Federation
134
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:41:00 -
[119] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Lord Zim wrote: Were you against this suggestion? How many months have you guys spent on drafting this? Did you guys really think it wasn't gameable? We've had some brief internal discussion about it, but the bottom line is that it is inappropriate for the CSM to decide for itself, what the next election rules should be. It would be unethical for us to have some month-long pow wow, decide what we think is best, and than try to push that agenda on the public. This is exactly why Trebor put out an idea that he's put some time and energy into, as a starting point for discussion, not a formal proposal we want double checked before we push it on CCP. As for myself being for or against this particular proposal? That depends on what I learn from the public discussion in this thread.
You have 5 reverse gears and one forward, much like a French tank. |
Tomytronic
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
224
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:42:00 -
[120] - Quote
Aryndel Vyst wrote:I have a proposal: How about we let accounts vote for the person they want to, the end? Then, and here's the kicker, at the end of the voting period we count the votes, now bear with me here, and we decide the winners based on who got the most votes.
You know that's not fair. In that theoretical system, active players with a vested interest in the game would get someone who represents them to make decisions about their game for them.
You know that can't possibly work.
|
|
|
|
|
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 |