|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 23 post(s) |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
4563
   |
Posted - 2013.02.21 12:48:00 -
[1] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Is it 14 votes exactly, or up to 14? If I only see 4 candidates I like the look of, do I have to cast the remaining 10 or can they be discarded?
I'm wondering this myself. There haven't been 14 good candidates in any of the previous elections. What's more important is, that there are always godawful ones and it'd be a shame to be forced to have your votes have even a theoretical chance of going to a person who you actively oppose. |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
4566
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 17:13:00 -
[2] - Quote
Jackie Fisher wrote:Malcanis wrote:Jackie Fisher wrote:This all looks simpler and more transparent than the previous system. That would be one way to describe it. If by simpler you mean much more complex, and if by transparent, you mean transparently obvious that this will hand the result completely to large voting blocs. Pretty much. For some reason this blog made me think of great solutions in engineering.
The problem presented there isn't the right one. A soft saddle could easily make things worse. As long as you're going to be using a saddle, which is pretty much mandatory on a bicycle, a pants based solution is going to be a good one.
On topic: Could candidates post their own voting list suggestions? You know, to get together a strategy to ensure like minded people get elected or unwanted candidates get forced out in favor of less crappy buffer candidates. |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
4570
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 12:52:00 -
[3] - Quote
ITT internet spaceships is serious business. Seriously people it's just a game. Low voting numbers here isn't the impending death of the western democracy. If people just want to play a game and ignore all the politics and the elections, let them. They're doing it right. |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
4616
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 09:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:CCP Dolan wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Compulsory suffrage. We've looked into this and it isn't doable for the CSM8 elections. (I personally would really like to do it for CSM9) You've got to be kidding me. Compulsory suffrage is a really bad idea. At the VERY LEAST if you make voting compulsory then have the candidate's names listed in random order for each time the voting page is rendered. That way people don't get elected just because their names are higher up in the alphabet or something ******** like that.
Just have the first option always be "Compulsory voting should be removed". Surely the people suggesting the system have enough confidence in it to be up to that challenge. |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
4617
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 10:23:00 -
[5] - Quote
CCP Dolan wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:
At the VERY LEAST if you make voting compulsory then have the candidate's names listed in random order for each time the voting page is rendered. That way people don't get elected just because their names are higher up in the alphabet or something ******** like that.
The names are, and have always been, listed in a random order. To do otherwise would blatantly skew the results.
Seriously speaking I think the biggest issue would be, that currently you offer an entertainment service for a subscription. Players then pay it and in turn get access to your servers and the service. With mandatory voting you're basicly telling them, that they now owe you a duty to vote and you're going to deny them access to the service they paid for until they fulfill that duty they owe to you. I just can't see that ending well for you in any scenario. You sell a service and every eligible voter has paid you for it. We don't owe you anything, so it's just a matter of how badly trying to force the issue ends up for you. |
|
|
| |
|