| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dierdra Vaal
Veto.
Veto Corp
89
   |
Posted - 2012.03.03 14:38:00 -
[1] - Quote
Vote Match
I have activated the matching process. You can go here if you want to get started right away!
What is Vote Match!
Vote Match! is a service that allows players to quickly compare their opinions on Eve Online with the opinions of the candidates in the CSM elections. It is based on real world services like Vote Match in the UK and Stemwijzer in the Netherlands. The service is particularly useful for those of you who do not know who to vote for: the resulting matches provide an easy way to cut down the fourty candidates to a shortlist of people who match your views on Eve. You can then use this shortlist as a guide for which candidates to look at in detail.
How does it work?
We have a collection of fourty statements about Eve Online, which can be answered with Strongly Disagree, Disagree, No opinion, Agree and Strongly Agree. Over the past ten days we have collected the answers of the CSM election candidates (all but three who despite multiple reminder evemails chose not to fill in a profile).
Once you fill in the questionnaire, we determine where your answers match those of the candidates, and calculate a match percentage from that. You are then able to see all the answers from all the candidates (ranked by highest to lowest match). In many cases, candidates have added an explanation of their answers, which you can see by hovering your cursor over it.
How do I start?
You can go here if you want to get started right away!
Veto #205
* * *
Director Emeritus at EVE University
* * *
CSM1 delegate, CSM3 chairman and CSM5 vice-chairman |
Dierdra Vaal
Veto.
Veto Corp
97
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 17:33:00 -
[2] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:Vote match's algorithms are bullshit. You can answer that every area should be the highest priority, on the 'which zone should be the highest, above all others' questions - which is exactly what Seleene did, and voila.
It's a rationalist trap, p much.
Actually what you're saying is that the questions are bad. It's true that candidates are able to contradict themselves in their answers with the current questionnaire. How that reflects on said candidate is up to the user's own interpretation, though.
Veto #205
* * *
Director Emeritus at EVE University
* * *
CSM1 delegate, CSM3 chairman and CSM5 vice-chairman |
Dierdra Vaal
Veto.
Veto Corp
97
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 18:05:00 -
[3] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:You refused to place a link to the comments of each candidate in a concise place on the first page of the site to allow users to opt out of the algorithm, despite all the yowling about looking to provide choices.
Rational Choice theory - and the offshoot crap it spawns like ~algorithms~ , game theory and such, are tautological nonsense at best, and easily manipulated at worst. Comments are lost, nuance is lost, and the 'hurr we can just find better questions' fails year after year.
You're not interested in providing an easy place for voters to view commentary on the issues - not without making them jump through hoops of your own devising.
You can actually opt out of the algorithm by not filling in any answers and simply hitting submit.
Veto #205
* * *
Director Emeritus at EVE University
* * *
CSM1 delegate, CSM3 chairman and CSM5 vice-chairman |
Dierdra Vaal
Veto.
Veto Corp
108
|
Posted - 2012.03.06 20:59:00 -
[4] - Quote
None ofthe Above wrote: but hopefully some additional work can be done coming up with questions before hand. I hate to say it because I know it would be a mess on some levels, but perhaps you could post the questions in advance and get feedback.
Actually I'd posted two threads asking for question suggestions - one on the eve general forums here on eve-o, and one on failheap. I also posted the provisional selection of questions on the FHC thread for feedback.
Veto #205
* * *
Director Emeritus at EVE University
* * *
CSM1 delegate, CSM3 chairman and CSM5 vice-chairman |
Dierdra Vaal
Veto.
Veto Corp
109
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 18:22:00 -
[5] - Quote
Ripard Teg wrote:Yeep wrote:Except you had the exact same criticisms from multiple people last year, and from myself (at least) in the announcement thread this year. You can blame it on the FHC focus group but if they gave you terrible questions last year why would you go back? This. The questions were in many cases almost word-for-word identical to last year, too, so I'm not sure why you asked for suggestions.
about 25% are brand new, and quite a few other questions got reworded. I didn't pick 40 brand new ones because
1) there weren't 40 good suggestions
2) many of the old questions proved to be decently divisive
I asked both here and on FHC since I wanted to reach out to more than just one community. I'm not blaming FHC (or any other groups), I'm simply pointing out that I can't just magically pull questions out of thin air that everyone is going to be happy with. It's a process over time to test and refine questions. I've already decided on some changes for next year, for example.
Veto #205
* * *
Director Emeritus at EVE University
* * *
CSM1 delegate, CSM3 chairman and CSM5 vice-chairman |
Dierdra Vaal
Veto.
Veto Corp
111
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 12:13:00 -
[6] - Quote
Kenhi sama wrote:are not all canidates shown in the compare table? caus I cant find riverini in my one.
Two of the fourty candidates chose not to participate. Riverini is one of them. Tiger Would is the other.
Veto #205
* * *
Director Emeritus at EVE University
* * *
CSM1 delegate, CSM3 chairman and CSM5 vice-chairman |
| |
|