These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Disenfranchised Voters
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Highauger's animated corpse
Jove Observation And Neutrality Negotiations Act
#21 - 2012-03-29 12:48:53 UTC
War Kitten wrote:
If he had been booted off the CSM I might be inclined to agree with a re-vote of some sort.

But by the looks of it, Mittens stepped down on his own. I don't think it was necessary but I guess he did.

Then again, nobody got to re-vote when Ankhenstinkapalooza or Larkonis were removed. Why would we re-vote when a member steps down?


Erm 10,000 voters? Crucbible? The obvious capitulation to outside influence.
The destruction of the whole vote. Riverini? So much to choose from.
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#22 - 2012-03-29 13:59:18 UTC
Stafford Hollis wrote:
With The Mittani now having been banned from serving on CSM7 and the change to the rules where there are no longer any alternates, it seems the only fair thing to do is to have a re-vote. With The Mittani receiving almost 20% of the votes all alone, that is a huge number of voters whose voice will no longer be heard on the CSM. Is this how CCP wants to have the "player's voice" influenced? With the positive changes they have been making and the beneficial support that CSM6 has given to CCP in a trying year, I believe they will want to do the right thing here and ensure that the disenfranchised voter's voice is heard.



The goon vote is not "disenfranchised" they just voted poorly for an unstable candidate who didn't know how to behave in front of the cameras. Through this saga the goons have been saying "don't like it, vote for someone else next time" ... well whats good for the goose. Next time goons should choose better who their votes go to.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom
Jerioca
The Kunin Group
#23 - 2012-03-29 14:22:27 UTC
[quote=War Kitten]If he had been booted off the CSM I might be inclined to agree with a re-vote of some sort

But by the looks of it, Mittens stepped down on his own. I don't think it was necessary but I guess he did.

Then again, nobody got to re-vote when Ankhenstinkapalooza or Larkonis were removed. Why would we re-vote when a member steps down?[/quote

I'm not a Mittani fan. I am a fan of what Mittani and the rest of CSM6 did with their time and effort last year. So, for the record Mittani stepped down for the automatic position of CSM7 chairman not from CSM7 itself. The 30 day ban CCP gave out to him stripped him of his seat on CSM7 so he had stepped down from chairman but has been booted out of CSM7

Love him or hate him The Mittani gets things done. I'm sad that a all too human mistake has cost him the chairman's seat but it was a price that had to be paid. I'm disgusted that opportunistic and unecessary politicing and political correctness taken to its most extreme has cost him his seat on CSM7. EVE, CCP, the community and the CSM itself will be the lesser for this

I do hope Mittens runs for CSM8 and that he is allowed to stand for election to it. If he does I will vote for him. Not because I'm a goon pet or alt, not because I like Mittens and not because I agree with what goonswarm stands for. I will vote for him because based on his record in CSM6 and his alliance's achievements, the man gets things done and gets them done well

As it stands the current CSM is now run by a very loud tail wagging a very quiet dog and all the tail wants to do is destroy everything around it. This is no way for a player advocacy to behave. It is especially no way to behave before they have even taken their seats. The current CSM elect have let down themselves and the EVE community as a whole far more than Mittani has

I therefore support a call for the CSM7 election to be rerun with the original candidates minus The Mittani standing for re election
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#24 - 2012-03-29 14:34:29 UTC
Yeah, reading deeper it seems he's off CSM7 because of the ban and he'd only intended to step down from chairmanship.

Rules is rules though.

I also hope he runs again for CSM8 - things got done.

In the meantime, yeah those 10058 people have a right to feel cheated. But blaming the makers and enforcers of the rules instead of the one who irresponsibly broke them might be a little misguided.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Twil Akachi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#25 - 2012-03-29 14:35:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Twil Akachi
Aiden Andraste wrote:
Can we please have more comparisons to RL politics on the forums? There aren't enough. All of you who make these terrible comparisons should seriously thrill yourselves IRL.

I agree, masturbation can have a well documented calm---what? That's not what he meant? Ohhhhhhh.....
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#26 - 2012-03-29 14:40:27 UTC
War Kitten wrote:
Yeah, reading deeper it seems he's off CSM7 because of the ban and he'd only intended to step down from chairmanship.

Rules is rules though.

I also hope he runs again for CSM8 - things got done.

In the meantime, yeah those 10058 people have a right to feel cheated. But blaming the makers and enforcers of the rules instead of the one who irresponsibly broke them might be a little misguided.


Its pretty unlikely he will ever be able to run for CSM again at this point. The rules of a successful application are you mustn't have a history of bannings for certain things. Harrassment of another player is very certainly one of those things.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom
Macon Chalaise
VNM Biological Survey Corps
#27 - 2012-03-29 15:49:07 UTC
The CSM and the election were in no way tainted by mittens. Mittens tainted himself.

CSM7 starts on April 4th.

No ones votes were wasted. Mittens was in fact elected to the CSM and the chair...and then he screwed up.

He's the ONLY person any of you "I CAN HAZ RELECTION?" people should be mad at.

If you feel like mittens stepping down was a waste of your vote, take it up with him. He "wasted" it.

Here's to fire. Not the fast and furious kind that burns down shacks and shanties, but the slow, seductive kind that takes down pants and panties - Irish Toast
Di Mulle
#28 - 2012-03-29 16:10:12 UTC
Aiden Andraste wrote:
Can we please have more comparisons to RL politics on the forums?


Tbh, why we shouldn't ? Because you say so ?
<<Insert some waste of screen space here>>
Stafford Hollis
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#29 - 2012-03-29 17:55:17 UTC
War Kitten wrote:

In the meantime, yeah those 10058 people have a right to feel cheated. But blaming the makers and enforcers of the rules instead of the one who irresponsibly broke them might be a little misguided.


As the CSM is supposed to "represent society interests to CCP", and no actually make any rules or have any power other than "minor oversight" (as evidenced by Incara), a re-vote seems almost mandatory. Whether or not you support or voted for The Mittani (I did not BEEP BEEP), you can easily see how those votes are actually as if they were never cast. Voter turnout should be the primary objective of any election and since there are no longer any alternates (whoops), the best and most effective way to ensure that CCP does not reincarnate Incara is to have a re-vote and ensure that there are the full number of EFFECTIVE voices there to provide the necessary oversight to make sure the benefits that have already started to show fruit are not wasted.

And lets be real folks, Mittens surely knows the correct people at CCP and if you think his influence is any less or more simply because he is officially on the CSM or the chair of the CSM, you are seriously delusional. I want the CSM to be as effective as possible, but overall I want EVE to be a good game.
Amity Lane
Hek Mining Association
#30 - 2012-03-29 18:20:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Amity Lane
Nobody was disenfranchised. Your votes were cast, and counted, and your candidate elected.

Your candidate was removed from office after he won the election. It's not as if your votes were never tallied...were that the case, there would have been no office to remove him from.

It is the responsibility of the voter to choose his candidate wisely.

It is the responsibility of the candidate to conduct himself appropriately in the best interest of his constituents.

There is a line of succession in place. That's what the alternates are for. "So you die, Captain, and we all move up in rank." There's even precedent for this.

I understand that you're upset by events. I would be too were it my candidate. However, that doesn't simply waive your responsibility as voters, his responsibility as a CSM candidate/member, and CCP's responsibility to uphold the rules that are already in place.

You can't just suddenly decide you don't like the rules because this time around they don't favour your interests.

Edit: To do that would disenfranchise the 80% of voters who wisely chose a candidate that didn't get themselves ejected.
Stafford Hollis
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#31 - 2012-03-29 18:26:05 UTC
Amity Lane wrote:

There is a line of succession in place. That's what the alternates are for. "So you die, Captain, and we all move up in rank."


Actually, there are NO alternates this year, so the precedent does not apply in this situation at all. There is one less member than initially voted for. And based on the previous year's work and the influence that Mittens had on CCP after the fiasco that was Incara, can you truly say that the vote was poorly placed? I, and many others, would hastily disagree with anyone who thinks (honestly) otherwise.

Even Riverini of all people said that Mittens had done a good job in the lead up to this CSM election.
Amity Lane
Hek Mining Association
#32 - 2012-03-29 18:33:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Amity Lane
Stafford Hollis wrote:
Amity Lane wrote:

There is a line of succession in place. That's what the alternates are for. "So you die, Captain, and we all move up in rank."


Actually, there are NO alternates this year, so the precedent does not apply in this situation at all.

I was under the impression that the top 7 candidates were on the CSM, and the next 7 were alternates. Is that not the way it has worked in the past?
Quote:
There is one less member than initially voted for. And based on the previous year's work and the influence that Mittens had on CCP after the fiasco that was Incara, can you truly say that the vote was poorly placed? I, and many others, would hastily disagree with anyone who thinks (honestly) otherwise.

Even Riverini of all people said that Mittens had done a good job in the lead up to this CSM election.

What Mittani has done in the past, good or bad, is irrelevant. Past good deeds do not erase later bad ones, or "entitle" him to anything.

And while it's not for me to decide whether or not the vote was poorly placed, recent events would suggest it was considering that person was found guilty of an EULA breach and banned. It's probably not something that could have been predicted, but it is what it is. People who voted for Roosevelt's 4th term couldn't have predicted that he'd die shortly into his term. They ended up with Truman regardless.
Prince Kobol
#33 - 2012-03-29 18:47:48 UTC
Stafford Hollis wrote:
With The Mittani now having been banned from serving on CSM7 and the change to the rules where there are no longer any alternates, it seems the only fair thing to do is to have a re-vote. With The Mittani receiving almost 20% of the votes all alone, that is a huge number of voters whose voice will no longer be heard on the CSM. Is this how CCP wants to have the "player's voice" influenced? With the positive changes they have been making and the beneficial support that CSM6 has given to CCP in a trying year, I believe they will want to do the right thing here and ensure that the disenfranchised voter's voice is heard.


Well if he received almost 20% that means there is nearly 80% of those who voted who are still happy with the out come.

I think nearly 80% represents more of the player base then nearly 20%..

The fact that you could not even be bother to figure out the exact number (was going to say it isn't difficult but you a Goon Pet Pubbie so I will forgive) shows how much you care

Any way, we Pubbie and Pub-Lords do not hate you

WE LOVE YOU

Big smileBig smileBig smileBig smile
Stafford Hollis
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#34 - 2012-03-29 19:13:51 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:

The fact that you could not even be bother to figure out the exact number (was going to say it isn't difficult but you a Goon Pet Pubbie so I will forgive) shows how much you care

Any way, we Pubbie and Pub-Lords do not hate you

WE LOVE YOU

Big smileBig smileBig smileBig smile


Such intelligent, witty banter. Thank you sir.
Prince Kobol
#35 - 2012-03-29 19:23:33 UTC
Stafford Hollis wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:

The fact that you could not even be bother to figure out the exact number (was going to say it isn't difficult but you a Goon Pet Pubbie so I will forgive) shows how much you care

Any way, we Pubbie and Pub-Lords do not hate you

WE LOVE YOU

Big smileBig smileBig smileBig smile


Such intelligent, witty banter. Thank you sir.


Coming from a Test Pubbie Pet that means quite a lot..

Why Thank You Good Sir Big smile
Di Mulle
#36 - 2012-03-29 19:51:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Di Mulle
Disclaimer: the names are just picked randomly.

Say, Seleene tomorrow also breaks the EULA (NDA, whatever). His voters now are disenfranchised. Re-vote ? Of course !

Say, Green Lee resigns because of some unexpected RL stuff. His voters now are disenfranchised. Re-vote ? Of course !

But well, no need to imagine things. Mintrolio's voters, they are disenfranchised like right now. Re-vote should have started yesterday, I'd say.
<<Insert some waste of screen space here>>
Stafford Hollis
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#37 - 2012-03-29 20:22:23 UTC
Re-vote, special election....call it what you want. It happens when positions are not properly filled for any number of reasons. And with their being no alternates this year, it seems that it is the only logical choice. Have everyone vote and the winner gets the spot.
ConXtionS
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2012-03-29 20:27:43 UTC
You had your vote, your vote was taken, your vote was put in the proper place.

It is NOT the rest of eve's fault that your guy didnt finish the term.

Let go of the past and work towards next year.

VOTE CONXTIONS CSM 8

I promise I wont make an ass of myself infront of the whole eve community, sony and reporters....
Stafford Hollis
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#39 - 2012-03-29 20:38:33 UTC
That is the best part, I didn't even vote for Mittens. It is just wrong to tell 10000 accounts. Too bad, sorry.
Macon Chalaise
VNM Biological Survey Corps
#40 - 2012-03-29 21:46:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Macon Chalaise
Stafford Hollis wrote:
Re-vote, special election....call it what you want. It happens when positions are not properly filled for any number of reasons. And with their being no alternates this year, it seems that it is the only logical choice. Have everyone vote and the winner gets the spot.


The CSM7 positions WERE properly filled. Voting took place and the results were announced by CCP. Mittens had the most votes and indeed won his slot on the CSM and the chair on top of that. THEN he screwed up.

The CSM was not tainted in any way. What mittens did was not associated with any CSM activity.

No reason for a re-election.Pirate

Here's to fire. Not the fast and furious kind that burns down shacks and shanties, but the slow, seductive kind that takes down pants and panties - Irish Toast
Previous page123Next page