These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

New Method of CSM election
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2011-10-16 22:01:38 UTC
(i dont know if this is done at ALL already but:)

since we have some otherwise COLORFUL characters in the CSM and sh*t actually seems to be getting done, that even though some of the memebrs may not get re-elected due to in-game positions and adversity among the EVE population:

every CSM the former CSM gets 1 week to more or less orientate the enw CSM in how to effectively use ther roles adn go about stuff, basically pre-training to be CSM, this sint gonna mean that a Mittani will always be replaced with a Mittani-clone, but that the CSM would be able to go over with the new CSM what methods worked and which didnt, and while that CAN be done anywyas, i figure it might help just to FORCE them to get together and talk.

then again i might be slightly tired right now due to math exams tomorrow and a lack of sleep in the last 48 hours, so if my post makes no sense or is utterly pointless, feel free to ignore the thread...
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2011-10-16 22:05:29 UTC
No doubt that already occurs to some degree. I'm sure CSM6 talked with CSM5 concerning what to expect from CCP, etc.
Renan Ruivo
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#3 - 2011-10-16 22:08:04 UTC
Isn't this what normally happens on a person/team replaces another person/team on one specific role? This is so basic that it doesn't even need mentioning.

The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die.
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#4 - 2011-10-16 22:10:26 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Isn't this what normally happens on a person/team replaces another person/team on one specific role? This is so basic that it doesn't even need mentioning.

you would be surprised, im on a internship with LG&E in RL, and we lost a team member who got replaced with some kid fresh outta college, spent about 4 weeks of watching him screw up his job because no one ever orientated him, they just hired him and put him to work.
The Apostle
Doomheim
#5 - 2011-10-16 22:10:36 UTC
imho, the only CSM model that can represent the entire Eve playerbase has to be based on representative boundaries.

Admittedly, highseccers are going to have trouble fielding a rep because they don't play as a collective. In my mind, that's their problem and it just needs someone with drive/motivation to make it happen. It would still only be one voice so he needs to be good.

But certainly low sec and 0.0 need to be proportionally represented regardless. And it's "proportionally" that's critical.

We also need to have maximum terms to I think. Polarisation of the current CSM is all too obvious. Not their fault but an issue nonetheless.

That's my 2 bits.....

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]
The Mittani
State War Academy
Caldari State
#6 - 2011-10-16 22:10:40 UTC
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
(i dont know if this is done at ALL already but:)

since we have some otherwise COLORFUL characters in the CSM and sh*t actually seems to be getting done, that even though some of the memebrs may not get re-elected due to in-game positions and adversity among the EVE population:

every CSM the former CSM gets 1 week to more or less orientate the enw CSM in how to effectively use ther roles adn go about stuff, basically pre-training to be CSM, this sint gonna mean that a Mittani will always be replaced with a Mittani-clone, but that the CSM would be able to go over with the new CSM what methods worked and which didnt, and while that CAN be done anywyas, i figure it might help just to FORCE them to get together and talk.

then again i might be slightly tired right now due to math exams tomorrow and a lack of sleep in the last 48 hours, so if my post makes no sense or is utterly pointless, feel free to ignore the thread...


We had a transition document and forum-sharing period between CSM5/CSM6, methods like this are already in place.

~hi~
mkint
#7 - 2011-10-17 00:01:28 UTC
The reason why we have so few GOOD CSM members is because of the problems inherent in a multi-party system. When all the smart voters' votes are split between the good candidates, and all the pants-on-head-ruhtarded voters put their votes into whoever will buy them candy, you get pants-on-head CSM members.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
Nel Gardier
Time Sync
#8 - 2011-10-17 00:19:11 UTC
mkint wrote:
...and all the pants-on-head-ruhtarded voters put their votes into whoever will buy them candy...
I'll be happy with ISK thanks.

With so few votes, my powerblock of five accounts (if ever active again) has got to be worth something. Blink
KaarBaak
Squirrel Team
#9 - 2011-10-17 02:59:34 UTC

I thought there weren't going to be anymore CSM elections?

Dum Spiro Spero
Goddess Ishtar
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2011-10-17 06:53:04 UTC
KaarBaak wrote:

I thought there weren't going to be anymore CSM elections?

Chairman For Life Mittani canceled them.
pussnheels
Viziam
#11 - 2011-10-17 08:06:20 UTC
main problem what i have with the elections is the fact that less than 18% of the playerbase actually voted ,
Because of these low voters turn out it can be rigged easily , hence the 2 goons in the current CSM

Another frustrating factor is that there alot of people out there that don't care about or even worse don't even know what the CSM stands for or can do for them

It would be a better game if we had a voter turn out of more than 25% pref 33% or even more , you probably end up with a even more colourfull set of characters as delegates

I do not agree with what you are saying , but i will defend to the death your right to say it...... Voltaire
Feligast
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#12 - 2011-10-17 08:09:12 UTC
pussnheels wrote:
main problem what i have with the elections is the fact that less than 18% of the playerbase actually voted ,
Because of these low voters turn out it can be rigged easily , hence the 2 goons in the current CSM


While I applaud what you're trying to do, explain to me how 82% of the playerbase not voting = "rigged"
pussnheels
Viziam
#13 - 2011-10-17 09:22:57 UTC
Feligast wrote:
pussnheels wrote:
main problem what i have with the elections is the fact that less than 18% of the playerbase actually voted ,
Because of these low voters turn out it can be rigged easily , hence the 2 goons in the current CSM


While I applaud what you're trying to do, explain to me how 82% of the playerbase not voting = "rigged"


what i mean by rigged is the following

Even tho i despise you Goons , i do admire the way you guys pull together i don't think there is any other alliance that can rely on a loyal core of members like the goons
So with 7000 members when even 1/2 of them vote with all their second or third account you already have a large percentage of the voters turnpout

So i am not saying your CSM delegates cheated not at all , But it is relative easy with such turnout to manipulate the results

I do not agree with what you are saying , but i will defend to the death your right to say it...... Voltaire
Anela Cistine
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#14 - 2011-10-18 03:13:25 UTC
pussnheels wrote:
So with 7000 members when even 1/2 of them vote with all their second or third account you already have a large percentage of the voters turnpout


It isn't 7000 + x, it's 7000 - x. Most goons have at least one character from each account in Goonswarm. I have 2 accounts, both accounts have 2 goons, so I show up as 4 goons, but get only 2 votes. The only accounts likely to have 0 goonswarm characters are those who need a "clean API" for spying and corp scams, which is honestly not as many as you think. Goonswarm probably controls less than 4,000 votes.

The problem isn't large nulsec voting blocs, it is the disorganization apathy of independent players. It is simple to fix. Not easy, but simple. You have all the tools you need.


  1. Well before the election, have all the independent candidates agree to abide by a straw poll. The 50 or so guys that are thinking of running for CSM have a pre-election. They agree ahead of time that only the top 5 or 10 (or whatever) will officially enter the election, and the others will throw all their support behind the winners. The goal is to get the total list of candidates down to under 20, so that there is some chance average players will actually read about the candidates. A wall of 50 guys who want a free trip to Iceland is a turn off.

  2. Use your combined expertise and resources to polish your message and get it out there to the eve community. Try to get popular bloggers to push one each, and explain why that one guy is a great choice for CSM.

  3. Get the 80% of players who never bother to vote to pres buttan for one of your guys. Overcoming voter apathy isn't easy. You could try travelling around highsec pasting links to the voting page into local, I guess. The easier you make it to vote, the more likely people are to do it.



As long as everyone with a valid passport and some free time is competing for the non-alliance vote, even small alliances will be able to steamroll the election. You need fewer, better candidates if you want to compete. You need to reinvent party politics.
FlamesOfHeaven
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#15 - 2011-10-18 03:21:31 UTC
Anela Cistine wrote:
pussnheels wrote:
So with 7000 members when even 1/2 of them vote with all their second or third account you already have a large percentage of the voters turnpout


It isn't 7000 + x, it's 7000 - x. Most goons have at least one character from each account in Goonswarm. I have 2 accounts, both accounts have 2 goons, so I show up as 4 goons, but get only 2 votes. The only accounts likely to have 0 goonswarm characters are those who need a "clean API" for spying and corp scams, which is honestly not as many as you think. Goonswarm probably controls less than 4,000 votes.

The problem isn't large nulsec voting blocs, it is the disorganization apathy of independent players. It is simple to fix. Not easy, but simple. You have all the tools you need.


  1. Well before the election, have all the independent candidates agree to abide by a straw poll. The 50 or so guys that are thinking of running for CSM have a pre-election. They agree ahead of time that only the top 5 or 10 (or whatever) will officially enter the election, and the others will throw all their support behind the winners. The goal is to get the total list of candidates down to under 20, so that there is some chance average players will actually read about the candidates. A wall of 50 guys who want a free trip to Iceland is a turn off.

  2. Use your combined expertise and resources to polish your message and get it out there to the eve community. Try to get popular bloggers to push one each, and explain why that one guy is a great choice for CSM.

  3. Get the 80% of players who never bother to vote to pres buttan for one of your guys. Overcoming voter apathy isn't easy. You could try travelling around highsec pasting links to the voting page into local, I guess. The easier you make it to vote, the more likely people are to do it.



As long as everyone with a valid passport and some free time is competing for the non-alliance vote, even small alliances will be able to steamroll the election. You need fewer, better candidates if you want to compete. You need to reinvent party politics.


this
KaarBaak
Squirrel Team
#16 - 2011-10-18 03:31:57 UTC  |  Edited by: KaarBaak
A little under 15% of the eligible accounts cast a vote in the last CSM. Of the votes that were cast, 70% voted for someone who was elected to the CSM (as primary or alternate). That translates to about 10% of the eligible accounts.

That's actually the highest representation percentage to date.

I'm not sure that getting more people to vote is the answer...as those people could just be more of what you believe are the "wrong people" from the alliances in nullsec.

Creating some kind of complexity in the hopes of making things more 'democratic' is somewhat counter-intuitive also, as it removes variables from the equation that folks that hope to manipulate the election have to worry about.

No...I think we have a pretty good system...or, as the old saying goes: "It's the worst system in the world, except for all the others."

How many other games even come close to something like the CSM?

Dum Spiro Spero
Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#17 - 2011-10-18 03:37:16 UTC
As others have pointed out high-sec isn't organized as it has no need to be, different play style.
Others have mentioned what about having one from each area of EVE (high-sec, low-sec, 0.0, WH ....)

The problem is how do you guarantee that with people having so many alts.
Then you could look at someone like me who gets bored with high-sec then goes to 0.0 for awhile then later on goes back to high-sec in one endless loop.
By the definitions above I don't fit in any group so that would mean I couldn't even run.
I am sure there are lots of people out there that do a little bit of everything.

Only way your going to get a serious election is to make it show up when people log in, there is a post about it some where.
Short of that, well...... and even if you do get over 50 % of the people voting.
Not sure anything is really going to make a difference.




EVERYBODY KNOWS
Mara Tessidar
Perkone
Caldari State
#18 - 2011-10-18 06:01:09 UTC
mkint wrote:
The reason why we have so few GOOD CSM members is because of the problems inherent in a multi-party system. When all the smart voters' votes are split between the good candidates, and all the pants-on-head-ruhtarded voters put their votes into whoever will buy them candy, you get pants-on-head CSM members.



This is blatantly untrue. Goons don't wear pants.
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2011-10-18 06:15:02 UTC
As the president of CCP said "don't listen to what they say, watch what they do." - as such, your thoughts on this CSM seem off . I'd personally take the thanks to all those who voted with their wallets across this term vs the CSM.

They are the ones that got CCP to change their tune. The CSM can ask and "assist" by prioritizing community requests, they don't do dink beyond talk.

That talk does have value but not as much as when a few thousand accounts suddenly go inactive. Money talks and all that.
DarkAegix
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2011-10-18 06:40:03 UTC
Perhaps some kind of free-for-all fight to the death.
IRL.

HD livestream for one PLEX.
123Next page