These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

How's this for improving the CSM and the election process?

Author
Ai Shun
#21 - 2012-03-05 23:40:57 UTC
Vyl Vit wrote:
I'd refer you to point A. The CSM is seen as not representing their views, and B. the size of New Eden makes it impossible to familiarize yourself with the candidates. Who these people are...which ones actually represent narrow, alliance interests but say in their blurb how for the playerbase they are? The present system has packed the CSM with people who, the net result is, are viewed by the majority as having nothing to do with them....at the risk of repeating myself.


Well, two thoughts to that.

(a) They should nominate and elect a different candidate if those standing for the CSM does not represent their views and;
(b) EVE is a MMO and therefore a social game; if you do not know the candidates personally from within New Eden you can use Google, the EVE forums and your friends in-game to learn more about them and what they truly represent

To me the answer is not to build a restrictive, seemingly dysfunctional system that does not really represent the reality of EVE in response to a dissatisfaction with the current candidates. The answer is to change the candidates by electing the ones you want.
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
#22 - 2012-03-05 23:47:53 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
Vyl, obviously you put some time and thought into your OP.

I'll give you props for that.

What everybody seems to be missing in these 'how to make things better' threads though, is that none of it matters. The CSM is a sham to placate and distract those who can be bothered to follow the politics of this game. CCP will do as they always have. Just exactly what they want.

What they are good at, nay superb at, is doing what they do and spinning it to make it seem as if it was the players decision.

For example: Mittens and his minions strutting around like they had some influence in CCP's decision to hold off on WIS. WIS was broken and rushed. CCP knew it and released just enough to **** people off. Then they did their little Icelandic summit and 'caved' to the wishes of the unwashed masses. Now they are everyone's darlings instead of a big bad game company pulling unfinished content promised for years.

This is how it's always been and how it always will be. The election is pointless. The CSM is pointless. People should just stop trying to figure out ways to fix it.

Mr Epeen Cool



mr epeen, you're right, we should all stop voting for everything, sure **** it,, what do we know, those with money and power know better, us slaves should stfu and do as they say.

you Mr Epeen are a perfect example of why people should vote and push an opinion or a view.

just look at you on here pushing your view, by your logic we should ignore what you have to say and step in line to the CCP beat of the drum.



Gabriel DiCozza
Alpha-Cephei
Lyrae Alliance
#23 - 2012-03-07 23:56:00 UTC
Hiya,

Suggestion to improve the election process: let's take a look at the ideas of "liquid democracy" used by the German Pirate Party. Now I am not German, I am not a pirate, but after reading a few articles I did a quick search on the Internet and there is plenty of interesting, innovative stuff. Stuff that might more fit the format of our community than the old 19th century scheme of regular elections of representatives.

I made a blog post about it but I don't say much more than above. I just know what I read on a few pages.
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#24 - 2012-03-08 00:01:28 UTC
Gabriel DiCozza wrote:
Hiya,

Suggestion to improve the election process: let's take a look at the ideas of "liquid democracy" used by the German Pirate Party. Now I am not German, I am not a pirate, but after reading a few articles I did a quick search on the Internet and there is plenty of interesting, innovative stuff. Stuff that might more fit the format of our community than the old 19th century scheme of regular elections of representatives.

I made a blog post about it but I don't say much more than above. I just know what I read on a few pages.


1) Your avatar looks just like a younger David Hasselhoff, so I'm not buying your claim of a lack of german decent for one red second.

2) Elected representatives go back to ancient Greece, not merely the 1800s.

3) I didn't bother looking at your blog because I'm blinded by your resemblance to David Hasselhoff.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

The Mittani
State War Academy
Caldari State
#25 - 2012-03-08 00:06:25 UTC
hey look, another anti-democratic siloing proposal from someone afraid of the will of the people being expressed in a way they disagree with

authoritarians masking themselves in 'better democratic' rhetoric are everywhere in election season

~hi~

Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#26 - 2012-03-08 00:07:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Darth Gustav
The Mittani wrote:
hey look, another anti-democratic siloing proposal from someone afraid of the will of the people being expressed in a way they disagree with

authoritarians masking themselves in 'better democratic' rhetoric are everywhere in election season


Come on, Mittens.

Doesn't that dude (Gabriel DiCozza) look like The Hoff?!?

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#27 - 2012-03-08 00:36:55 UTC
Democratie in it's idology is perfect but in our reality it's everything you want but what we have now.
What we can see everywhere around is always a matter of cash, power and rule by fear where eatch and every day you vote more laws to restric your already short liberty, and you're happy doing this (we all).

The only purpose of modern democratie is to serve the bigger cash masters that are totally and completely above of whatever law or constitution, after all they only need to show their cash to see no matter the country open their doors and arms with hypocrit friendly smiles like diplomats are used and train all day for.

If people were really intelligent, lived in real democraties surrounded by individuals concerned by the greater good of this democratie and other humans how could they possibly ever base their hole economie and social progress based on energy that is going to disapear or pollue for millions of years?
Let millions of other humans die of hungry and hilnesses because they don't have money to buy treatments nor have the most basic installations there should be for basic life like take a daily shower or have proper whater!
How can those let money and the single law of uncontrolable economics based on obscure rules that have no mercy for negative numbers rule our lives, reward the healthier with even more money and the poorer with even more taxes and everyone seems happy because they think their stupid and insignificant lifes will last forever?

Then you have scrubs complaining because their focking burger miss salt or peper... and their littre of soda is too hot. Or because hybrids haven't een correctly rebalanced too, heh (/self shat)

Socialist is the jealous hoar of Republicans and Nationalists, whenever they get there they do everything like others, just worst.

What does this crap has to do with the game? -hell it's just the perfect condensed example of the political shït you eat and please veryday, you log in an internet space ship game, not any space ship game but THE space ship game, and you stupidly start again...

Hello??? -why too serious?
It's simple: if it's not blue you shoot, if it's red or another colour than blue, purple/green, you shoot.


No I'm not drunk (yet) but that might happen soon (tm)
Skye Aurorae
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#28 - 2012-03-08 00:49:38 UTC
The most democratic election process would be for everyone to rank all candidates in order of preference, the nullsec blocs would of course vote up their blues and vote down their reds, weakening block voting.

But, most people could never be bothered ranking so many candidates so this isn't going to work.

Skye Aurora is a 7 year old Girl Who Wants to be on the CSM! Unfortunately, the Lawyers say you have to be 21 - oh well.

The Mittani
State War Academy
Caldari State
#29 - 2012-03-08 01:15:56 UTC
Skye Aurorae wrote:
The most democratic election process would be for everyone to rank all candidates in order of preference, the nullsec blocs would of course vote up their blues and vote down their reds, weakening block voting.

But, most people could never be bothered ranking so many candidates so this isn't going to work.


Protip: the only serious issue that nullsec blocs disagree on is titan tracking. On almost every major issue of the day, all of nullsec unites come CSM-time. Single Transferable Vote systems are amusing, until you realize the reality - every bloc would collude.

Oh wait, we already do. I mean, we'd collude more.

~hi~

Vyl Vit
#30 - 2012-03-08 01:19:11 UTC
Ai Shun wrote:
(a) They should nominate and elect a different candidate if those standing for the CSM does not represent their views...
there's no nomination process...you seem to miss the point about the woefully limited information available upon which to cast a vote.
Ai Shun wrote:

(b) EVE is a MMO and therefore a social game; if you do not know the candidates personally from within New Eden you can use Google, the EVE forums and your friends in-game to learn more about them and what they truly represent
...and you seem to miss the point about the size and scope of New Eden making that dysfunctional so far in the CSM selection process.
Ai Shun wrote:

To me the answer is not to build a restrictive, seemingly dysfunctional system that does not really represent the reality of EVE in response to a dissatisfaction with the current candidates. The answer is to change the candidates by electing the ones you want.
Organized isn't necessarily restrictive. Opening up the CSM to MORE members can't be seen as restricting it. And, you've yet to make a point that invalidates the suggestion as dysfunctional, though you post with a confident tone...as though you're the one-stop-shopping expert on the subject.

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.

Vyl Vit
#31 - 2012-03-08 01:20:46 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
Skye Aurorae wrote:
The most democratic election process would be for everyone to rank all candidates in order of preference, the nullsec blocs would of course vote up their blues and vote down their reds, weakening block voting.

But, most people could never be bothered ranking so many candidates so this isn't going to work.


Protip: the only serious issue that nullsec blocs disagree on is titan tracking. On almost every major issue of the day, all of nullsec unites come CSM-time. Single Transferable Vote systems are amusing, until you realize the reality - every bloc would collude.

Oh wait, we already do. I mean, we'd collude more.

And, here we have it the CSM admitting it's skewed in their own happy direction.

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.

The Mittani
State War Academy
Caldari State
#32 - 2012-03-08 01:26:24 UTC
Yes, yes - winning a democratic election is 'skewed' because you don't like how the majority voted. The classic authoritarian line.

It's a shame you're so afraid of the will of the people!

~hi~

Ai Shun
#33 - 2012-03-08 01:30:02 UTC
Vyl Vit wrote:
Ai Shun wrote:
(a) They should nominate and elect a different candidate if those standing for the CSM does not represent their views...
there's no nomination process...you seem to miss the point about the woefully limited information available upon which to cast a vote.
Ai Shun wrote:

(b) EVE is a MMO and therefore a social game; if you do not know the candidates personally from within New Eden you can use Google, the EVE forums and your friends in-game to learn more about them and what they truly represent
...and you seem to miss the point about the size and scope of New Eden making that dysfunctional so far in the CSM selection process.
Ai Shun wrote:

To me the answer is not to build a restrictive, seemingly dysfunctional system that does not really represent the reality of EVE in response to a dissatisfaction with the current candidates. The answer is to change the candidates by electing the ones you want.
Organized isn't necessarily restrictive. Opening up the CSM to MORE members can't be seen as restricting it. And, you've yet to make a point that invalidates the suggestion as dysfunctional, though you post with a confident tone...as though you're the one-stop-shopping expert on the subject.


There is no formalised nomination process. But Izzle has been standing as a prime high-sec candidate (With the concept of driving conflict). There is a person, perhaps self nominated, perhaps through forum interaction. If enough people care about an issue they can choose to put their votes behind one person, effectively nominating that person. Look at Hanz. You know he is going to be pushing heavily for Faction Warfare. Has he been nominated as the champion of Faction Warfare, both through his own passion for the subject and the support he has received on his conversations here and elsewhere?

As to the size and the scope, I don't have an answer for laziness / inability to care enough about an issue to resolve your own ignorance on it. I don't believe people who could not be arsed to do a bit of basic investigation should be able to participate, but that is a whole other subject. However, if somebody cared enough they could investigate the candidates that piqued their interest. I did precisely that and it changed my vote for this CSM. It was going to be a choice between Izzle and The Mittani, but I did not vote for either of them. There was another candidate who, through conversations with a few friends in-game, the platform they stood for and a read of their forum discussions convinced me they would be a better fit for what I want out of EVE. Even though I never met them. That is the way these things work; you need to do your own research as a voter.

As to dysfunctional. Yes, I believe it is. Activities in EVE happen all across EVE. The region they happen in has preciously little meaning because of the inherent mobility of players. Trying to tie it down is dysfunctional, no matter how much you want to pretend it isn't. I strongly believe the answer is in electing the right candidates; not in forcing some arbitrary, useless thumbfucks of candidates on the rest of the game simply because they drop their salvage in Jita or Aikononen or wherever. I don't like systems that place limits on a persons' ability to participate in the democratic process. I've seen that type of thing **** up too many times in real life.

But that's an opinion and this is a discussion forum.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#34 - 2012-03-08 01:37:27 UTC
I'm pretty sure that all of the people who make these insane threads complaining that the people who get the most votes win elections never actually vote.

Also vote for Alekseyev Karrde.
Vyl Vit
#35 - 2012-03-08 01:38:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Vyl Vit
The Mittani wrote:
Yes, yes - winning a democratic election is 'skewed' because you don't like how the majority voted. The classic authoritarian line.

It's a shame you're so afraid of the will of the people!

The idea is to get the majority to vote, which you are well aware, has yet to happen.
Then, I can see why you'd ridicule the idea.

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.

Jango RumRunner
Tech Horizons
#36 - 2012-03-08 01:56:37 UTC
This guy is kool!

Vote PsychoBitch for CSM 7

Here is his stuff -


Read the complete Platform here: http://www.eve-online-dark-taboo.com/vote/

If you want your vote to count just once in EVE vote for PsychoBitch.

Sick of CCP devs and their hair-brained, half-baked, blue-balled ideas?

Sick of self-important fat puds and frail half-elves on the CSM?

Sick of things in eve that should have been fixed A G E S ago not being fixed

and new errors being introduced daily?

Make your one vote count finally, vote for PsychoBitch!

If you are voting for someone who has been in the CSM before - you have wasted your vote on F A I L

Don't be a failure, be a hero. Vote for PsychoBitch now!

Campaign Song
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnOZAEbk7r0

If you don't drink whiskey - VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE
If you don't like having sex with women - VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE
If you don't live life on your own terms - VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE

THIS IS ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW IN LIFE - ANYTHING WRITTEN BELOW IGNORE
Vyl Vit
#37 - 2012-03-08 02:08:04 UTC
Jango RumRunner wrote:
This guy is kool!

Vote PsychoBitch for CSM 7

Jango. I see you've spammed all the threads. May the banhammer visit you soon.

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.

Har Harrison
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2012-03-08 02:47:44 UTC
Vyl Vit wrote:
The Mittani wrote:
Yes, yes - winning a democratic election is 'skewed' because you don't like how the majority voted. The classic authoritarian line.

It's a shame you're so afraid of the will of the people!

The idea is to get the majority to vote, which you are well aware, has yet to happen.
Then, I can see why you'd ridicule the idea.

Then stop complaining and get out and do something about it. Rally support behind a high sec candidate that is running a serious campaign (e.g. Hans)

The issue here is that Mittens and a number of the null sec guys have 1) a large support base and 2) have put some thought into what they want to achieve
Alot of the high sec wannabes have not done this prep work and due to being part of high sec, whilst having a potentially greater number of potential voters, find they lack a way to reach them as 1) they are not aligned, 2) do not shaer a common communication platform (e.g. alliance forums/comms etc...).

Getting high sec to vote is like herding cats. Getting null sec to vote is like herding sheep

The onus needs to be on the people in high sec to find the QUALITY candidate that represents their interests amongs the trolls and fail candidates that are otherwise a waste of a vote

Hans is getting serious attention as he is running a real election campaign, not a "look at me, come vote for me" high school president popularity contest.

< tl ; dr > Get off your backside, vote for Hans and get your friends to and see what happens when a high sec grass roots movement takes hold.

Serene Repose
#39 - 2012-03-08 02:52:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Serene Repose
Har Harrison wrote:
Vyl Vit wrote:
The Mittani wrote:
Yes, yes - winning a democratic election is 'skewed' because you don't like how the majority voted. The classic authoritarian line.

It's a shame you're so afraid of the will of the people!

The idea is to get the majority to vote, which you are well aware, has yet to happen.
Then, I can see why you'd ridicule the idea.

Then stop complaining and get out and do something about it. Rally support behind a high sec candidate that is running a serious campaign (e.g. Hans)

The issue here is that Mittens and a number of the null sec guys have 1) a large support base and 2) have put some thought into what they want to achieve
Alot of the high sec wannabes have not done this prep work and due to being part of high sec, whilst having a potentially greater number of potential voters, find they lack a way to reach them as 1) they are not aligned, 2) do not shaer a common communication platform (e.g. alliance forums/comms etc...).

Getting high sec to vote is like herding cats. Getting null sec to vote is like herding sheep

The onus needs to be on the people in high sec to find the QUALITY candidate that represents their interests amongs the trolls and fail candidates that are otherwise a waste of a vote

Hans is getting serious attention as he is running a real election campaign, not a "look at me, come vote for me" high school president popularity contest.

< tl ; dr > Get off your backside, vote for Hans and get your friends to and see what happens when a high sec grass roots movement takes hold.

It would take an epic case of myopia to glean "complaining" from the OP. As there's no shortage of this malady in EVE, I'm not surprised. Everybody agrees to "find the quality candidate..." all the OP is suggesting is a way to make the search doable, instead of the obvious needle in a haystack it is now.

Don't forget, or don't pretend otherwise, people lie in EVE for a living. Just because somebody puts a bunch of stuff about themselves on the "I'm a candidate" page, doesn't mean they can be believed. Albeit, (and I'm sure Vyl agrees) questioning a candidate in Regional might not reveal much, either. However, something can be done, or should be done to improve the process, or the minority taking advantage of the dysfunction will continue to have it all their way.

OR, we could all engage in my favorite passtime - ridiculing the CSM and CCP for pretending they amount to something other than very lucid figments of each other's imaginations.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.

Ai Shun
#40 - 2012-03-08 02:53:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Ai Shun
Har Harrison wrote:
The onus needs to be on the people in high sec to find the QUALITY candidate that represents their interests amongs the trolls and fail candidates that are otherwise a waste of a vote

Hans is getting serious attention as he is running a real election campaign, not a "look at me, come vote for me" high school president popularity contest.


+1, particularly for the "campaign" that Hans has been running.

Serene Repose wrote:
Don't forget, or don't pretend otherwise, people lie in EVE for a living. Just because somebody puts a bunch of stuff about themselves on the "I'm a candidate" page, doesn't mean they can be believed.


True, but fortunately we live in an age where we have a world of information at our fingertips. Apart from the basics of internet search engines, forum searches and the blogs; we have the ability to communicate with people in the game world. All these tools can help find that "needle in a haystack" and ensure that it's not lying about being a pitchfork.
Previous page123Next page