Was the "Mittani Mandate" manufactured? Did Darius squeak by through voting shenanigans? So much tinfoil going around right now, I have an idea to (hopefully) put an end to it.

With the debate over how many short-term accounts were created to influence the votes, I think it would be telling to see a breakdown of how many votes went to each candidate from accounts that were less than 52 days old. It would be even more interesting to see a report on how many of those accounts are still active 31 days after elections closed.

Perhaps, your char should have to be at least a year old (paid for the year) to vote in the election. Why someone with 2 weeks in eve can vote anyway doesnt make sense. If he really is only 2 weeks old he doesnt know where the eve rest rooms are, much less what the game is about.

Perhaps, your char should have to be at least a year old (paid for the year) to vote in the election. Why someone with 2 weeks in eve can vote anyway doesnt make sense. If he really is only 2 weeks old he doesnt know where the eve rest rooms are, much less what the game is about.

I think votes should be issued by real players and not accounts. Otherwise we're back in the old "pay to win" scenario we already fought against (remember jita riots?) :P

I think votes should be issued by real players and not accounts. Otherwise we're back in the old "pay to win" scenario we already fought against (remember jita riots?) :P

Personally I cant afford to keep 100's of accounts ACTIVE for a year just to rig an election.. I suppose others can.

So we should all send out passports in to CCP in order to vette our personhood

Its a fine idea, but we have to figure out how to implement it in a fair fashion. Without an implementation strategy its just blue sky ideology.

If someone is consistently paying for multiple accounts, I have no problem with them getting multiple votes.

Two rules I'd definitely have if they were mine to make:

Only accounts that have paid for at least 4 billing cycles can vote. This significantly raises the cost of creating accounts just to cast votes. The extra $45 or 3 plex per account would be quite prohibitive.
Accounts which have been identified as botters lose voting privileges permanently. This could be a penalty for the second strike if necessary.

Well, is it fair that someone that can afford 10 accounts have more rights than someone who can afford only 2 or even 1? I think in an election we should be all equal and with same rights. Because CSM members should be representing Eve real players, not accounts or economic might. In and outside game. It's my point of view...

Well, is it fair that someone that can afford 10 accounts have more rights than someone who can afford only 2 or even 1? I think in an election we should be all equal and with same rights. Because CSM members should be representing Eve real players, not accounts or economic might. In and outside game. It's my point of view...

CCP has our billing info, why not just have one vote per set of unique billing information, on accounts that are more than 30 days old? (or have had at least one confirmed payment made). Most people have alts that are linked to the same paypal account/credit card, this should stop most casual multi-voting.

I know of more than one instance of family members playing Eve together. Would you deny them their votes because they live in the same house and pay the bills with the same credit card?

What's more, I could easily game this system without any sort of fraud. I couldn't do it on a large scale, but I could certainly get by with 3-4 accounts going undetected by your system. Multiply that by hundreds of goons (just for example, nobody get your panties in a bunch) and you see that the potential problem still exists.

Any solution which punishes the honest while rewarding the dishonest isn't acceptable. And besides, see my previous post regarding shareholders.

The current system allows en masse voting with alts. While implicating a 'one credit card one vote', or a 'one IP one vote' rule will inconvinence some people, and will be exploited by a few more, it will reduce multi-voting by far more, so the overall effect will be fairer.

However, if you can think of a better solution, please do suggest it, my post was just an idea, and it does have problems, as you have pointed out.

You base your whole proposal on the notion that each player deserves only one vote. As I said, I disagree.

You could do it on the following categories:

Per account.
Account has to be X age.
Account subscription has to be uninterrupted for X number of months.

So you could say:

1 Vote per account
Account has to be 3 months old minimum.
Account has to have an uninterrupted subscription period to EVE for 3 months.

That way you could make it so you cannot make an account, vote, deactivate and then only reactivate for 1 month every year to get votes.

Its not fool proof but would help. The 1 vote per person thing would fail.

Ugh... the only thing worse than all of the tinfoil is all of the paranoid idiots like you guys hypothesizing ridiculous solutions to problems that don't exist. You seriously think that people were willing to make an account, pay the equivalent of $20-30, and keep it doing nothing for 2 months just to pad a few votes? And even if it did happen, you think it was widespread enough to have any effect whatsoever? AND you think that because they could've done that, it requires new stupid limitations on voting? The main problem is, if they are willing to pay the money to have the account, they are entitled to another vote. Just like alt accounts. How do you draw the line?

TL;DR, Stop being paranoid idiots.

At the minute, it is slightly unclear, as many players seem to think that voting on multiple accounts is somehow an exploit or cheat.

Except of course keeping multiple accounts is easy in the Promised Land of nullsec, whereas among highsec I guess their incursion runners can keep multiple accounts with isk, but don't make more money from them.

Just two points on that, highsec incursions can make 150m ISK per hour, not including LP's.

Ugh... the only thing worse than all of the tinfoil is all of the paranoid idiots like you guys hypothesizing ridiculous solutions to problems that don't exist.

You seriously think that people were willing to make an account, pay the equivalent of $20-30, and keep it doing nothing for 2 months just to pad a few votes

It was an attempt by them to say nullsec is swimming in isk and thus highsec incursions are perfectly balanced.

Was the "Mittani Mandate" manufactured? Did Darius squeak by through voting shenanigans? So much tinfoil going around right now, I have an idea to (hopefully) put an end to it.

With the debate over how many short-term accounts were created to influence the votes, I think it would be telling to see a breakdown of how many votes went to each candidate from accounts that were less than 52 days old. It would be even more interesting to see a report on how many of those accounts are still active 31 days after elections closed.