These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

I see no reason to vote in the next CSM, but what to do see is a need for a
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#61 - 2012-03-02 01:16:11 UTC
Ares Renton wrote:
People just vote for their alliance leader.

It's like if elections were held for presidency of Earth. Who would win? Probably some Asian or Russian guy. Who would then proceed to export all of America's wealth to the East.

Why?

Because that's democracy.


Luckily moving debt is pretty easy, no bulky transport vehicles required.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
#62 - 2012-03-02 03:07:20 UTC
That's a great idea you have there.
Stonecrusher Mortlock
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#63 - 2012-03-02 04:54:22 UTC
well look at that
Calfis
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#64 - 2012-03-02 19:08:47 UTC
Jonathan Ferguson wrote:
That's a great idea you have there.


No its a bad idea and you should feel bad for thinking about it first. Imagine the rabble if this is how voting IRL works.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#65 - 2012-03-02 19:20:00 UTC
Stonecrusher Mortlock wrote:
I see no reason to vote in the next CSM, but what to do see is a need for a unvote option to be included in CSM 8 during the next go around.

So that you can unvote the ones you think unworthy.


You only see that because you don't look further than the surface. It's a bad idea and just makes an election more of a game.

But don't be discouraged.

One dumb opinion doesn't make you a dumb person. Keep on thinking and a smart opinion might pop out.

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.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#66 - 2012-03-02 20:59:42 UTC
If you hate the CSM and want it to utterly fail vote Xenuria for chairman.
Jita Alt666
#67 - 2012-03-02 21:24:11 UTC
Jonathan Ferguson wrote:
That's a great idea you have there.


Amazing. 6 thumbs up over 3 months. Very popular idea. Oh the well known goon troll Andski has more likes in that thread than the OP.
Lithely Jaine
Perkone
Caldari State
#68 - 2012-03-03 00:59:11 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
If you hate the CSM and want it to utterly fail vote Xenuria for chairman.


I hate the CSM i want EVE to fail so i will vote in someone that will give distorted image of the community of eve to CCP.

Stop living in a bubble Null sec alliances represent more then half of active accounts if not more.

and guess what ? to be in null sec a Alliance needs to be ORGANIZED. Of course null sec candidate will have a advantage since they are already part of a massive Organized group.

High sec candidates don't have that advantage.
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#69 - 2012-03-03 04:17:31 UTC
Lithely Jaine wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
If you hate the CSM and want it to utterly fail vote Xenuria for chairman.


I hate the CSM i want EVE to fail so i will vote in someone that will give distorted image of the community of eve to CCP.

Stop living in a bubble Null sec alliances represent more then half of active accounts if not more.

and guess what ? to be in null sec a Alliance needs to be ORGANIZED. Of course null sec candidate will have a advantage since they are already part of a massive Organized group.

High sec candidates don't have that advantage.


And what exactly stops them to try form such Organized group ?
Merovee
Gorthaur Legion
Imperium Mordor
#70 - 2012-03-03 07:54:37 UTC
Only so many sheep dogs control the flock. Only so many people vote and only a few get elected. Its the human way in any organized system. Why would you think EVE be any different? Blink

NPC Empires should have four seats at the CSM table. High sec accounts can vote for High sec players and be heard for once.

Empire, the next new world order.
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
Templis CALSF
#71 - 2012-03-03 08:52:01 UTC
Stonecrusher Mortlock wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:
you can not vote and that would be just as effective.


no that's a show of indifference.



i have 5 accounts that's 5 votes, but have no one to vote FOR, the only thing after than is to use then against the guys you see as not worthy to be on the CSM, like the people that run for the CSM for no other reason than for the free trips and have to useful input but have such large voting blocks behind then they can get on just because they want to.


vote for Hans, he's actually a pretty level headed guy who is fighting for the lowsec/empire crowd.
Shobon Welp
GoonFleet
Band of Brothers
#72 - 2012-03-03 09:15:15 UTC
Jaroslav Unwanted wrote:
Lithely Jaine wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
If you hate the CSM and want it to utterly fail vote Xenuria for chairman.


I hate the CSM i want EVE to fail so i will vote in someone that will give distorted image of the community of eve to CCP.

Stop living in a bubble Null sec alliances represent more then half of active accounts if not more.

and guess what ? to be in null sec a Alliance needs to be ORGANIZED. Of course null sec candidate will have a advantage since they are already part of a massive Organized group.

High sec candidates don't have that advantage.


And what exactly stops them to try form such Organized group ?


Their own apathy and ineptitude.
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#73 - 2012-03-03 09:19:44 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
Ares Renton wrote:
People just vote for their alliance leader.

It's like if elections were held for presidency of Earth. Who would win? Probably some Asian or Russian guy. Who would then proceed to export all of America's wealth to the East.

Why?

Because that's democracy.


Luckily moving debt is pretty easy, no bulky transport vehicles required.

Brilliant! Big smile

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.