It's certainly not GOOD - they've basically lost what CSM 6 gained with the players - but to paint it as some catastrophe reminiscent of the early CSM's is nonsensical, even for you. Credit where credit is due - they seem to have made some good inroads with CCP, they just did it while forgetting the whole "representing the players" part of the deal. Hopefully CSM 8 can take the positives and fix the negatives.

I doubt that conclusion. It'll be interesting to run an analysis of FPTP with everyone's first pick though. That would be the closest approximation to a comparison of FPTP and STV.

EDIT: First post of this referred to "everyone's first prick". LOL. Terribly Freudian slip of me.

That is a fabulous idea, but I doubt CCP will play along sadly :(

Hopefully CSM 8 can take the positives and fix the negatives.

My own opinion is that the lack of communication from the CSM has caused the most harm.

Most people I play with couldn't even tell you who the chairman of the CSM7 is or was

In fact when you check his blog the last update was September 2012...

Now of course if he had some real life event that has happened which has meant he no longer had the time then of course that is fine, Eve is just a game regardless of how much we love it, however a short blog saying that he can no longer do his duties as chairman and then pass over the chair would of been the responsible and right thing to do.

I mean I'm pretty sure it could of been done in say what.. 2 - 3 mins?

Out of the 13 CSM 7 members we usually see posts from maybe 4 of them on a regular basis. The rest appear to do well... nothing.

I am sure if Two Step was given the Chair then we would of saw more interactive CSM, which in turn maybe wouldn't of caused so a low turn out.

Yes they did make some great leaps forward in being involved as a stakeholder. It is just the price that concerns me, the CSM went from being the voice of the players to just another arm of CCPs PR department, including cheerleading.

The fact that CCP did its largest ever campaign to get people to vote and the end result was a drop of 10,000 votes is a disaster. People did not want an STV system, and frankly people were turned off after CSM7s lack of transparency and communication.

The larger the backing the CSM has from the players the more it can act as our voice.

Edit: Apparently the turn out was 12.12% or there abouts, not my maths.

So that is a bloody disaster, down from 16.63% last year (With little advertising from CCP). CSM6 had a 14.25% turnout, CSM5 12.67%, before that the CSM terms were only 6 months long and the voter turn out really showed it CSM4 7.36%, CSM3 9,74%, CSM2 8,61%, CSM1 11,08%.

So the lowest turn out we have had since CSM changed to year long terms and you dont call that a disaster?

]This is probably where your 10k additional votes came from..

If that's the case, post with your CSM 7 main I guess?

Also I'm p. sure the PLEX account thing still required a minimum age before voting - one of my alt accounts couldn't vote last year for that reason. Don't remember if it was 30 or 60 days, though.

*loses 10,000 votes even with CCP actually trying to promote the election for once*

Mangala Solaris of RvB (highsec? how'd that happen?) .

You lost 10,000 votes last year due to 'the incident'. I guess technically it's a tie then between last year and this.

Mr Epeen

The one thing in life you can count on is not being able to count on Test :v

Sort is an amazing FC and cat herder, a delight to fly with.

Eagerly awaiting Frying Doom's post on how he is still right.

Yes I agree I was completely wrong, and there is only 3 Null sec CSM members this time. Not the 10 members I thought there was.

All nullsec is totally the same, and all of us nullsec candidates have the same experience, ideas, and were colluding for election.

I mean, I get the concern. I'd like it if we had a lowsec representative, and I'm disappointed Psychotic Monk didn't make it on for a different highsec perspective. I also really like the group we have, especially after having written what is probably several novels worth of skype chats over the course of the past week. On the whole, STV did okay and it can do better with improvements and better awareness pre-CSM9 voting.

I must admit I do like the line up of CSM8, but it is far to top heavy with Null members for the majority to ever take it seriously.

why would the majority of players dislike a csm that represents them by being majority null

If you have to even ask that, you really have no idea how most of the game views Null, do you?

I know how you view null. The majority of players, who are null players, obviously like it.

If that were true then voter turnout for Null really stinks.

i'd only care if it stunk compared to highsec. as a group we are not supermen, we are merely better men

Which leafs straight back to why should the majority of the game care about a CSM controlled by Null, who although a minority, think they are better than everyone else?

WHers are cool...most lowsec people too...heck, even a lot of people in hisec just log in and play without crying on the forums.

I guess the only people we actually look down on are the deranged hisec forum warriors who claim to speak for some silent majority that in actuality doesn't exist.

That said, there has been a steep decline in these Crusaders for No One, so perhaps soon we will all just get along.

Which leafs straight back to why should the majority of the game care about a CSM controlled by Null, who although a minority, think they are better than everyone else?