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) |
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
223
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:44:00 -
[121] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:As for myself being for or against this particular proposal? That depends on what I learn from the public discussion in this thread.
So you're saying you have absolutely no opinions of your own on the subject? |
Brooson
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
63
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:45:00 -
[122] - Quote
As representatives of the Community and our collective interests, instead of a implementing something stupid like reforming a simple voting policy can we put our effort into a system where we can reject the decisions of the CSM. Poor decisions such as this one?
The idea of removing the long standing democratic tradition of one man one vote (or in this case 1 account one vote) is childish and a clear grab of implementing a voting structure that can be manipulated by those wishing to ignore votes for personal gain.
I am ashamed that the standing CSM would feel they have a right to degrade my vote, and I am applaud that CCP would consider this as anything less then a desperate attempt to illegitimate a large portion of the PAYING user-group. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9403
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:45:00 -
[123] - Quote
The reason STV is GÇ£the better systemGÇ¥ is exactly because it is complicated. You can't have it both ways.
If you want a simple system, it will be flawed. The current one is flawed in that votes on lower-end candidates are wasted because the candidates (and thus the votes) get culled. The suggested system is flawed in that votes on higher-end candidates are wasted because those votes get culled. At least the former makes some kind of democratic sense GÇö not enough people agree with your fringe stance so it won't be part of the process GÇö but the latter is justGǪ weird. GÇ£Sorry, too many people agree with you so your voice doesn't matterGÇ¥.
If you want voting reform, bite the bullet and make it difficult because that's the only way to improve any voting system. It's just the nature of the beast (oh, and it's not all that difficult to either run or report, especially since it's done electronically GÇö it's a simple iterative process with one edge case that already has a given solution). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
556
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:45:00 -
[124] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
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,
You mean how it seems like half the CSM minutes are related to the election/Mittens in some form? That meeting took place months ago. So clearly this has been being kicked around for months. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Cabal |
Antoine Jordan
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:46:00 -
[125] - Quote
To the CSM: Instead of directly disenfranchising large blocs of voters because you feel they make up too much of the voting base, instead consider making more players aware of and engaged in the CSM. That way, rather than reducing the number of people who have a voice, you're increasing it. |
Lord Zim
1327
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:46:00 -
[126] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: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. So you've all had a chat about it, and none of you thought this was a gameable as all hell mechanic? Or did you avoid answering that question for a reason?
And given the vehemence with which you guys spent making sure you discussed, in great detail, how you could kick someone off the CSM team makes me dubious as to your claim of how little time has been spent on drafting this suggestion.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: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. So you're going to make sure Trebor catches all the flak for this one, and you'll swivel your cape to catch the most wind, despite the fact you came in guns blazing to defend the thread initially?
Okay, then. |
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
661
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:47:00 -
[127] - 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.
Here's your takeaway, then: A large coordinated voting bloc thinks that this system is **** because it would disenfranchise a portion, perhaps a large portion, of that bloc for no good reason. While historically there has only ever been one bloc (which is what makes the motives here questionable at BEST), this system would also quash any future attempts at coordinating votes by other groups as well.
tl;dr, it's ****, drop it.
Antoine Jordan wrote:To the CSM: Instead of directly disenfranchising large blocs of voters because you feel they make up too much of the voting base, instead consider making more players aware of and engaged in the CSM. That way, rather than reducing the number of people who have a voice, you're increasing it. Yeah seriously this. The CFC has so much voting power because we comprise an enormous percentage of the voting population. If you want to dilute our power, a better way to do it is roleplay like you're an american democrat and get more people to vote, instead of roleplaying like you're an american republican and we're all inner-city *******. This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
fofofo |
Lord Zim
1327
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:50:00 -
[128] - Quote
Antoine Jordan wrote:To the CSM: Instead of directly disenfranchising large blocs of voters because you feel they make up too much of the voting base, instead consider making more players aware of and engaged in the CSM. That way, rather than reducing the number of people who have a voice, you're increasing it. Ask Frying Doom about how to do this, he's been harping on and on about how this is the only solution. |
Alchenar
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:50:00 -
[129] - Quote
Tippia wrote:The reason STV is GÇ£the better systemGÇ¥ is exactly because it is complicated. You can't have it both ways. .
This isn't STV. It's STV with a special addon specifically designed to disenfranchise voters.
People aren't complaining that it's complicated. They are complaining that the proposal is deliberately designed to be undemocratic. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4541
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:52:00 -
[130] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Antoine Jordan wrote:To the CSM: Instead of directly disenfranchising large blocs of voters because you feel they make up too much of the voting base, instead consider making more players aware of and engaged in the CSM. That way, rather than reducing the number of people who have a voice, you're increasing it. Ask Frying Doom about how to do this, he's been harping on and on about how this is the only solution.
To be fair that's one thing he's been right about (on its own, anyway) please leave |
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4541
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:53:00 -
[131] - Quote
Alchenar wrote:Tippia wrote:The reason STV is GÇ£the better systemGÇ¥ is exactly because it is complicated. You can't have it both ways. . This isn't STV. It's STV with a special addon specifically designed to disenfranchise voters. People aren't complaining that it's complicated. They are complaining that the proposal is deliberately designed to be undemocratic.
Tippia is distinguishing between this proposed system and true STV. please leave |
Remnant Madeveda
Ixion Defence Systems Test Alliance Please Ignore
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:55:00 -
[132] - Quote
TL:DR - Changing the voting system to trivialize votes will just anger the people that are invested in making the game better and insure we affect the game more. CSM will be shuffled, and it will be made up of people who care about fixing the game rather than fixing and election.
Alright, so the CSM as a whole has decided to pitch an idea to some of the most devious, intelligent, and outright evil minds in the gaming world. They want to "adapt the voting system to get better representation" or so is the spirit of the idea, but they do so poorly. You've seen throughout the past 5 or so pages that everyone that plays eve with any real desire to influence the game will find a way to influence it. Within minutes of this post diplomats and strategists were already thinking of ways to make this work to their advantage. However, instead of just gaming the system, since you can be punished for doing so now, they chose to reveal the logical flaws in this system. Yet these same individuals "the concerned" are the ones that will be ignored in this new system of voting unless we game it, and it's more than mildly offensive that a "meet this quota and it doesnGÇÖt matter" system was even concocted.
This system will make it so that we as a whole must endeavor to do so in a new and creative way but rest assured, as these same gamers represent the most "concerned" individuals we will game you. The system will be explained, and the holes will be found, as they already have been. Then the diplomats, because those actually exist in this game, will sit down together and figure out how to make the same people that the CSM is so against getting elected take their jobs then surprisingly do them better.
I promise if this goes through it wont be the end of Eve, it wont be a 'change for the better" instead it will just be a further reflection that the b******* individuals are simply too lazy to actually vote, and the ones that want to will do so, but considering how the CSM tried to game us, it's only fair that we return the favor. Really sit down, do some actual work on something that affects the game and not the seat of prestige that you all currently hold. You want to know what the concerns are of the player base, read the forums, hell use local in system to find out. Communicate, plan, evaluate, test, re-evaluate, and release. That's the process, it's not hard. This is the communication, this system is terrible because it trivializes players, and is just as easy as any to game.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9403
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:58:00 -
[133] - Quote
Alchenar wrote:This isn't STV. It's STV with a special addon specifically designed to disenfranchise voters.
People aren't complaining that it's complicated. They are complaining that the proposal is deliberately designed to be undemocratic. GǪyou mean, exactly like I was saying. In fact, this proposal isn't STV in any form (with our without addons) GÇö it's a normal voting system with the GÇ£vote discardingGÇ¥ rule turned on its head. If anything, it's more close to some screwy kind of parallel-voting first-past-the-post system with a bias towards candidates close to the cut-off point. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2849
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:58:00 -
[134] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote: So you're going to make sure Trebor catches all the flak for this one, and you'll swivel your cape to catch the most wind, despite the fact you came in guns blazing to defend the thread initially?
I don't even see this as "taking flak" , we're all adults here and I haven't heard any of you attacking Trebor as a person, only discussing some valid criticism about one proposal.
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1407
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:58:00 -
[135] - 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.
This is going to be really crazy so I need you to sit down for a minute. Are you seated? I'm glad, this is going to blow your god damn mind.
It turns out that candidates aren't all equal! I know right? I learned something really crazy when I ran that I hope to share with you. Candidates, even those from the same alliance, can have different playing styles, points of focus, interests, and things they feel need to be fixed in Eve. People don't vote for an alliance, they vote for a person. A person who they feel will best represent those interests that matter most to them. I hope this has been helpful to you and I thank you for your time kind sir. God bless! |
Blawrf McTaggart
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1409
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:02:00 -
[136] - Quote
HVAC Repairman wrote:you're going to regret making this thread when we elect arghy as csm8 chair
With such motions as "i don't think i'm getting enough sex" and "hey guys what do you think of my homework" |
Blawrf McTaggart
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1409
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:02:00 -
[137] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Lord Zim wrote: So you're going to make sure Trebor catches all the flak for this one, and you'll swivel your cape to catch the most wind, despite the fact you came in guns blazing to defend the thread initially? I don't even see this as "taking flak" , we're all adults here and I haven't heard any of you attacking Trebor as a person, only discussing some valid criticism about one proposal.
but we invaded |
Lord Zim
1327
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:03:00 -
[138] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I don't even see this as "taking flak" , we're all adults here and I haven't heard any of you attacking Trebor as a person, only discussing some valid criticism about one proposal. He's not taking flak personally because it was published as a CSM-wide publication. In fact, it's in the very wording of the first posts.
Now you're pointing at Trebor and saying "it wasn't the CSM, it was his idea!" because there's a bit of a backlash because it's about as gameable as most CCP-induced game mechanics the past few years. |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
198
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:05:00 -
[139] - Quote
Someone is gonna get the albatross hung around their neck some election time and Hans is now making sure it isn't him This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
fofofo |
Haquer
Vorkuta Inc Goonswarm Federation
136
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:05:00 -
[140] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Lord Zim wrote: So you're going to make sure Trebor catches all the flak for this one, and you'll swivel your cape to catch the most wind, despite the fact you came in guns blazing to defend the thread initially? I don't even see this as "taking flak" , we're all adults here and I haven't heard any of you attacking Trebor as a person, only discussing some valid criticism about one proposal.
Because he's an unperson. |
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2849
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:06:00 -
[141] - Quote
Aryth wrote:You mean how it seems like half the CSM minutes are related to the election/Mittens in some form? That meeting took place months ago. So clearly this has been being kicked around for months.
It seems that way, but they aren't. A lot of that stems from the fact that the first session was documented using the transcript format we later decided was cumbersome, and tossed out. This left a lot of the players with the misunderstanding that the CSM cares more about its own internal bureaucratic structure than about the actual issues existing in the game.
Discussion about electoral reform has been kicked around for much longer than a few months, this is hardly some new, strange obsession of CSM7's. Players have been talking about this for years, and will very likely continue until we actually see electoral reform.
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4545
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:06:00 -
[142] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Lord Zim wrote: So you're going to make sure Trebor catches all the flak for this one, and you'll swivel your cape to catch the most wind, despite the fact you came in guns blazing to defend the thread initially? I don't even see this as "taking flak" , we're all adults here and I haven't heard any of you attacking Trebor as a person, only discussing some valid criticism about one proposal.
now let's not throw Trebor under a bus because this thread backfired! please leave |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
2155
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:08:00 -
[143] - Quote
The issue I have with STV is that making voting *harder* isn't going to increase voter turnout numbers. Certainly the system Trebor proposed has some downsides, but one thing it does get right is that the voters wouldn't have to expend much more effort.
As someone who was elected from a smallish community, my worry is that in the future there might be 4 or 5 wormhole dudes running, and I don't want to see that mean that nobody from w-space gets elected. Avoiding that sort of scenario is my #1 requirement for a new voting system. My other desired features:
2) Encourage a broad representation on the CSM. Having a FW guy, or a wormhole guy, or a highsec guy on the CSM is really useful when we need a POV on issues that pertain to those communities. 3) Make voting easier, or at least as easy as it is currently.
How about this for an alternate proposal:
Run the election like true STV, but people pick a candidate and that candiate's list becomes their STV vote. It would also be nice to support people picking their own STV vote list, but that would take more dev time on CCP's part. CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
|
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
223
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:08:00 -
[144] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: Discussion about electoral reform has been kicked around for much longer than a few months, this is hardly some new, strange obsession of CSM7's. Players have been talking about this for years, and will very likely continue until we actually see electoral reform.
Unless you have a vote on electoral reform all you really know is a couple of people want electoral reform really loudly.
Two step wrote: Run the election like true STV, but people pick a candidate and that candiate's list becomes their STV vote. It would also be nice to support people picking their own STV vote list, but that would take more dev time on CCP's part.
Again I'll say, if you don't have the resources to do electoral reform properly, don't do it at all. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2849
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:08:00 -
[145] - Quote
Haquer wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Lord Zim wrote: So you're going to make sure Trebor catches all the flak for this one, and you'll swivel your cape to catch the most wind, despite the fact you came in guns blazing to defend the thread initially? I don't even see this as "taking flak" , we're all adults here and I haven't heard any of you attacking Trebor as a person, only discussing some valid criticism about one proposal. Because he's an unperson.
An excellent point. I wish I could confirm Trebor's humanity, but I can't. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
116
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:10:00 -
[146] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: I don't even see this as "taking flak" , we're all adults here and I haven't heard any of you attacking Trebor as a person, only discussing some valid criticism about one proposal.
"Trebor's proposal" is specifically presented as a CSM suggestion:
Quote:Below we present one possible system that attempts to meet the above goals. We caution readers not to assume that this is a system we have decided upon; rather, it is presented as an example for discussion and improvement.
Could we get some clarity on if Trebor was wrong to imply this was CSM backed or if the rest of the CSM actually supports it? Given the clear wording of his post, your statements that "this is just Trebor's proposal!" means one of you is being deceptive. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4545
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:10:00 -
[147] - Quote
Two step wrote:The issue I have with STV is that making voting *harder* isn't going to increase voter turnout numbers. Certainly the system Trebor proposed has some downsides, but one thing it does get right is that the voters wouldn't have to expend much more effort.
As someone who was elected from a smallish community, my worry is that in the future there might be 4 or 5 wormhole dudes running, and I don't want to see that mean that nobody from w-space gets elected. Avoiding that sort of scenario is my #1 requirement for a new voting system. My other desired features:
2) Encourage a broad representation on the CSM. Having a FW guy, or a wormhole guy, or a highsec guy on the CSM is really useful when we need a POV on issues that pertain to those communities. 3) Make voting easier, or at least as easy as it is currently.
How about this for an alternate proposal:
Run the election like true STV, but people pick a candidate and that candiate's list becomes their STV vote. It would also be nice to support people picking their own STV vote list, but that would take more dev time on CCP's part.
i have a solution for increasing voter turnout:
encourage people to vote please leave |
HVAC Repairman
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
209
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:10:00 -
[148] - Quote
arghy as a csm chair would be cool because he'd be the only csm member ever detained for running up and down an airplane aisle naked Follow me on twitter |
RDevz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
114
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:11:00 -
[149] - Quote
Yeep wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: Discussion about electoral reform has been kicked around for much longer than a few months, this is hardly some new, strange obsession of CSM7's. Players have been talking about this for years, and will very likely continue until we actually see electoral reform.
Unless you have a vote on electoral reform all you really know is a couple of people want electoral reform really loudly.
What kind of vote should we have on electoral reform? First past the post? Single transferrable vote? Alternative vote? Condorcet cloneproof Schwartz sequential dropping? :ohdear: ~ |
digi
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
112
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:11:00 -
[150] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Lord Zim wrote: So you're going to make sure Trebor catches all the flak for this one, and you'll swivel your cape to catch the most wind, despite the fact you came in guns blazing to defend the thread initially? I don't even see this as "taking flak" , we're all adults here and I haven't heard any of you attacking Trebor as a person, only discussing some valid criticism about one proposal.
You don't see it as taking flak because you don't really care about your voters.
There's no point in attacking Trebor as a person because one only attacks when they don't have an argument. That isn't the case since none of you can do any of the things that you promised to do.
Read that again. You have not delivered. You are the do-nothing CSM. You've contributed nothing of note and you have failed in representing us. You and your fellow CSM representatives are failures.
This isn't classified as an attack because it's truth. This thread is proof that you are the do-nothing CSM. A waste of our faith and our time.
|
|
|
|
|
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 |