Though when you consider the number of alts goon might have in play (or padded accounts for voting) and that there are over 700k+ valid subscribed accounts it really kind of makes those figures quite indeterminate of complete player opinion. Especially when you look at that representation as being less than 1 percent of all accounts. Shows the level of interest afforded to CSM perhaps more than player approval of Goons, which we know will have been actively rallied to vote.

It's also a reflection on how important it is that the CSM represents player views.

Be interesting to see if apathy was alleviated how the situation would change.

But suffice to say, the so called importance of a mandate of the CSM and chair that the Mittani likes to express can easily be shown as "hype" when you see the actual figures.

While I regret that a frank exchange of ideas has reduced you to this state, I do appreciate your honesty in laying bare the real differences between The Mittani and other competitors, such as your preferred candidate Hans. People who support The Mittani are well-educated goodposters who coherently and intelligently discuss the important issues and work with all parties in eve willing to cross the lines that divide us to work as one to make EVE better. And, while it would be unfair to tar Hans himself as having written such a post, we must keep in mind the character of poster he has attracted, who would post such vitrol and hate, while freely and openly stating that you are unable and unwilling to back up your preferred candidate with calm, coherent reasoning.

The CSM is a body that must work together with people of opposing viewpoints, and it is clear The Mittani has had a stellar track record in this regard. In contrast, we must note the tribalist nature of the opposition where candidates are supported not on their own merits, but merely as "the anti-goon". And, when necessary, the CSM must be willing to openly and coherently explain why ideas are flawed and unworkable. Goons, The Mittani, and The Mittani supporters are able to coherently do this without needing to resort to petty name-calling. Those opposing The Mittani, well, we need only look at the above post.

It is a mandate of x% of the active or engaged playerbase, where the playerbase is seen as those who voted. This is how real world politicians will represent themselves as well, since only the people who vote are relevant to the proceedings.


When it comes down to it, representing more of the playerbase than anyone else, both in that election and historically, by sheer numbers and by the proportion of both voters and accounts, counts as irrefutably representing the playerbase within the confines of this electoral debate. If you cannot understand that, there is nothing more I can do to enlighten you.

It represents a confidence from the electorate not the playerbase.

The fact that the playerbase is apathetic to the CSM process does not or should not confer confidence to the political emphasis however. It is a lack of confidence if anything.

What has FDA scientific approval got to do with EvE spaceships and CSM candidates?

At best shouldn't you be comparing it to presidential candidacies, senate, parliamentary or other democratic representation of individuals representing constituancies?

One EVE, One Vote, One Chairman.

As an aside, using the "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein F++hrer" pattern, probably not the best idea.

As an aside, using the "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein F++hrer" pattern, probably not the best idea.

It is now time to vote for the Chairman, please use this link to express your support for Riverini: http://community.eveonline.com/council/voting/Vote.asp?c=454