Jita Park Speakers Corner

To elaborate a bit, Trebor's brilliant approach to us having "too much power" is to make sure we can't vote, when a much better approach would be to take measures to get more people voting, instead. This fact will be true regardless of how the voting system works, frankly.

I think it's pretty clear the proposed system is a non-starter. The CSM should just admit that and close this thread down and start over. If you really want ideas on a new system, ask us for ideas, don't start it with a proposal stating you want to bend over alliances for being organized.

Here's the surprise: you can take that criteria and you can shove it riiiiiiight where the sun don't shine.

You people have spent, what, 3 months thinking up this system, and it's pretty evident by the defensive posting that you guys really, really want to make sure us goons get to the back of the bus. There doesn't exist a single system, which will throw out votes in the fashion you guys want, which I will accept.


Uh, it's not "one paragraph" from "an idea", it permeates the requirements which you put forth as the minimum, requirements which are basically set there with the intent to **** goons.

Frankly, I'm wondering which universe you think this would be met with anything other than "what are you thinking?", and the way you, seleene, trebor and hans (well, until he basically threw trebor under the bus, real upstanding, high-quality CSM member right there, exactly what we need when CCP comes running to you guys with a **** idea :golfclap:) have basically scoffed scournfully at us for even daring to voice an opposing opinion is, to me, deeply worrying.

I mean, basically this discussion isn't about what you want to discuss because we can't agree on what to discuss. Trebor wants to discuss a "fair" system, and by that he means one that disenfranchises the "right" number of 0.0 votes. I, on the other hand, would like to discuss a fair system, meaning one that results in the CSM best reflecting the preferences of the voters.

As long as the discussion is about the former rather than the latter, there is nothing to discuss except reject the premise and continue to emphasize it is illegitimate to have the goal of a voting system be to properly disenfranchise a specific group.

the preferance of people is to have an equal representation on the csm council

So far, most people have expressed a disinterest in being represented on the CSM (by not voting).

perhaps the incident at fanfest has woken people up it did me also and unfortunately amongst a lot of those in hi sec enough wasnt done about that incident and has tarnished not just goons but those that COULD be assosiated with them i.e other alliances such as DNS and test with the same brush.

A discussion about voting systems is how to best structure the system to achieve the goals that we want. When we don't agree on the goals, there is no point in discussing the system because the system varies based on what goals you have. Various voting systems do better or worse at representing voters. Other voting systems do a better or worse job at disenfranchising people. How are we to discuss voting systems if we can't agree on if the goal is fair representation or disenfranchisement?

Now that I'm back from sailing and still a little drunk.

Hello people! I need to catch up on all the pages on this thread but I'll get it done soon.

Basically, changing the voting system isn't really a bad thing as long as it's done intelligently. EVE Players are almost always against any form of change historically. But after the dust settles and they get a chance to get used to it, all is well (most of the time anyways)

just quotin myself again