These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Call For Discussion : CSM Voting Reform

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Frying Doom
#981 - 2012-11-21 09:40:26 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
The CSM has been for the last few years especially, more a lobby group for Null sec than an actual player representative council.

Yes Null is a trashed wasteland but so few live there, effectively yes the CSM should have a long term road map including Null but the majority especially the work of CSM 6 (see notes on their work) was a road map of Null with some things shoe horned in for other areas, because of the exceptional work of individuals, not the CSM itself.

You didn't explain what you put in the phrase "a null sec joke".

Also, you missed a spot:

Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
So as the number of votes has increased across the board this number has remained effectively static, hmm almost like the same set of people are buying the same amount of accounts to vote each time.

So what you're saying is, you're looking at the numbers and going all "it must be a goon conspiracy to keep the common eve player down"?

No not goonswarm specifically no, I think it is a problem all over the voting spectrum, except maybe TEST as they got sold off Lol

Frying Doom wrote:
Not that this really matters much, it's a loop hole, you know it, I know it

Which part of this is a problem, and how do you solve it?


The problem is creating accounts just to vote and closing them when the plex expires a month later. How to solve it as stated above make accounts have to be active for 3 straight months prior to the election, so it can still be done but is 3 times more expensive.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#982 - 2012-11-21 09:44:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
That's right, keep hanging yourself with that rope. It's all a conspiracy, just one whose perpetrators shift year to year to what is apparently an exacting standard. Save us from ourselves, Frying Doom!

Or you know, **** off and stop poisoning this forum with your goddamn nonsense.

Frying Doom wrote:
[
The problem is creating accounts just to vote and closing them when the plex expires a month later. How to solve it as stated above make accounts have to be active for 3 straight months prior to the election, so it can still be done but is 3 times more expensive.


And also tells anyone under 3 months old (or god forbid anyone who resubbed and hasn't been around 90 days yet) that they have no part to play, all because Frying Doom decided that there's a problem!

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Arto Ruho
Doomheim
#983 - 2012-11-21 09:46:46 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
The problem is creating accounts just to vote and closing them when the plex expires a month later. How to solve it as stated above make accounts have to be active for 3 straight months prior to the election, so it can still be done but is 3 times more expensive.


Could it be that the publicity around the CSM vote gets more new players interested in Eve and the drop-off rates in terms of subscriptions reflect the usual drop-off in players after 1 month?
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#984 - 2012-11-21 09:48:24 UTC
Arto Ruho wrote:
Could it be that the publicity around the CSM vote gets more new players interested in Eve and the drop-off rates in terms of subscriptions reflect the usual drop-off in players after 1 month?


He doesn't even have any numbers of drop-offs of voting accounts, or how long accounts were subbed before they voted. He just talks like he does.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Frying Doom
#985 - 2012-11-21 09:52:41 UTC
Arto Ruho wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
The problem is creating accounts just to vote and closing them when the plex expires a month later. How to solve it as stated above make accounts have to be active for 3 straight months prior to the election, so it can still be done but is 3 times more expensive.


Could it be that the publicity around the CSM vote gets more new players interested in Eve and the drop-off rates in terms of subscriptions reflect the usual drop-off in players after 1 month?

Most new people have no idea what the CSM is as was shown to me last year as I flew around. Either way around if the loophole is used or not it should still be closed.

Also new players that vote is great but as they would hardly know which way is up it would be more benifital to the game as a whole if they had to be 90 days old.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#986 - 2012-11-21 09:54:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Snow Axe wrote:
Arto Ruho wrote:
Could it be that the publicity around the CSM vote gets more new players interested in Eve and the drop-off rates in terms of subscriptions reflect the usual drop-off in players after 1 month?


He doesn't even have any numbers of drop-offs of voting accounts, or how long accounts were subbed before they voted. He just talks like he does.

Strangely they don't release those numbers or really any numbers on anything these days.

And as I said if the loophole is not being used, great close it anyway.

Also you missed something: Veto Corp, Agony Unleashed, Pandemic Legion, Shadow Kingdom, Rooks and Kings or Triumvirate, none of these are Null sec groups? Funny I thought some where as they where all on CSM 5 Lol
Care to explain how no one from null was in CSM 5?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#987 - 2012-11-21 09:58:23 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
That's right, keep hanging yourself with that rope. It's all a conspiracy, just one whose perpetrators shift year to year to what is apparently an exacting standard. Save us from ourselves, Frying Doom!

Or you know, **** off and stop poisoning this forum with your goddamn nonsense.

Frying Doom wrote:
[
The problem is creating accounts just to vote and closing them when the plex expires a month later. How to solve it as stated above make accounts have to be active for 3 straight months prior to the election, so it can still be done but is 3 times more expensive.


And also tells anyone under 3 months old (or god forbid anyone who resubbed and hasn't been around 90 days yet) that they have no part to play, all because Frying Doom decided that there's a problem!

Or just preventing vote abuse by people making everyone elses vote worth more

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#988 - 2012-11-21 10:01:12 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
The problem is creating accounts just to vote and closing them when the plex expires a month later. How to solve it as stated above make accounts have to be active for 3 straight months prior to the election, so it can still be done but is 3 times more expensive.

Let's assume CCP does this, and the numbers still go up, what then?

Also, you missed a spot:
Lord Zim wrote:
You didn't explain what you put in the phrase "a null sec joke".

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#989 - 2012-11-21 10:01:54 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Strangely they don't release those numbers or really any numbers on anything these days.

And as I said if the loophole is not being used, great close it anyway.

Also you missed something: Veto Corp, Agony Unleashed, Pandemic Legion, Shadow Kingdom, Rooks and Kings or Triumvirate, none of these are Null sec groups? Funny I thought some where as they where all on CSM 5 Lol
Care to explain how no one from null was in CSM 5?


I ignored the groups because outside of PL, not a single one of those entities has appeared on CSM 6 or 7, so either they weren't part of the vote buying OR you're completely full of ****.

Also, closing the "loophole" with your solution screws people over. You don't screw people over unless it's necessary. You can't even show that a problem EXISTS, let alone that it's bad enough to necessitate screwing people over.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Frying Doom
#990 - 2012-11-21 10:04:47 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
The problem is creating accounts just to vote and closing them when the plex expires a month later. How to solve it as stated above make accounts have to be active for 3 straight months prior to the election, so it can still be done but is 3 times more expensive.

Let's assume CCP does this, and the numbers still go up, what then?

Then let them anyone paying almost 2 bill just to vote is worth it, also it might mean more actual people have decided to vote (possibly unlikely depending on the level of advertising permitted), actually I would like to see candidate banners intoduced as a huge add campaign would actually be fun to see.

Lord Zim wrote:
Also, you missed a spot:
Lord Zim wrote:
You didn't explain what you put in the phrase "a null sec joke".

No to be honest I just can not decipher what your meaning of the question is

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#991 - 2012-11-21 10:08:19 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
The problem is creating accounts just to vote and closing them when the plex expires a month later. How to solve it as stated above make accounts have to be active for 3 straight months prior to the election, so it can still be done but is 3 times more expensive.

Let's assume CCP does this, and the numbers still go up, what then?

Then let them anyone paying almost 2 bill just to vote is worth it, also it might mean more actual people have decided to vote (possibly unlikely depending on the level of advertising permitted), actually I would like to see candidate banners intoduced as a huge add campaign would actually be fun to see.

So as long as they "pay enough", anything goes?

Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
You didn't explain what you put in the phrase "a null sec joke".

No to be honest I just can not decipher what your meaning of the question is[/quote]
You said the CSM was a null sec joke. Explain what you mean by that.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Frying Doom
#992 - 2012-11-21 10:17:30 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

Then let them anyone paying almost 2 bill just to vote is worth it, also it might mean more actual people have decided to vote (possibly unlikely depending on the level of advertising permitted), actually I would like to see candidate banners intoduced as a huge add campaign would actually be fun to see.

So as long as they "pay enough", anything goes?

No but an extra 2 bill for an account just to vote, people are quite likely to just keep the extra account up and running and actually do something with it to benifit the game its self, even if it is just PI or a research alt.

Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

No to be honest I just can not decipher what your meaning of the question is

You said the CSM was a null sec joke. Explain what you mean by that.

I already did several posts ago just look on the previous page I think it is.

Or for the simple answer it is just a Null sec lobby group, yes it is more diverse now but the core seems to be focused on Null, see their latest document.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Ghazu
#993 - 2012-11-21 10:22:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Ghazu
Frying Doom wrote:


Or for the simple answer it is just a Null sec lobby group, yes it is more diverse now but the core seems to be focused on Null, see their latest document.

You supported Issler barbie lover openthedoor Dainze lol.

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#994 - 2012-11-21 10:26:25 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

Then let them anyone paying almost 2 bill just to vote is worth it, also it might mean more actual people have decided to vote (possibly unlikely depending on the level of advertising permitted), actually I would like to see candidate banners intoduced as a huge add campaign would actually be fun to see.

So as long as they "pay enough", anything goes?

No but an extra 2 bill for an account just to vote, people are quite likely to just keep the extra account up and running and actually do something with it to benifit the game its self, even if it is just PI or a research alt.

Let's make it 6 months then.

Frying Doom wrote:
Or for the simple answer it is just a Null sec lobby group, yes it is more diverse now but the core seems to be focused on Null, see their latest document.

Where do you think the most work needs to be done to eve?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Frying Doom
#995 - 2012-11-21 10:32:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

No but an extra 2 bill for an account just to vote, people are quite likely to just keep the extra account up and running and actually do something with it to benifit the game its self, even if it is just PI or a research alt.

Let's make it 6 months then.

6 moths would be a tad silly and players should have a fair knowledge after 3 with the ablity to make an informed vote.

Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Or for the simple answer it is just a Null sec lobby group, yes it is more diverse now but the core seems to be focused on Null, see their latest document.

Where do you think the most work needs to be done to eve?


Me personally my top 3 are

  1. POs's
  2. Corporate Management
  3. Null sec

In that order but as I am part of a minority as well I presume the Majority would argue with me as I am sure Mission runners would like some new missions as repeating the current set over and over is enough to want to make you kill yourself.
Also I am sure the lo-sec guys will tell you it is lo-sec and FW still needing a lot more work

And lets not forget War decs, so unbelievably stuffed that if they put the old system back it would be a ten fold improvement.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#996 - 2012-11-21 10:37:02 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
6 moths would be a tad silly and players should have a fair knowledge after 3 with the ablity to make an informed vote.

Let's make sure we're just getting people who are properly enthusiastic about voting, shall we?

Frying Doom wrote:
Me personally my top 3 are

  1. POs's
  2. Corporate Management
  3. Null sec

In that order but as I am part of a minority as well I presume the Majority would argue with me as I am sure Mission runners would like some new missions as repeating the current set over and over is enough to want to make you kill yourself.
Also I am sure the lo-sec guys will tell you it is lo-sec and FW still needing a lot more work

And lets not forget War decs, so unbelievable stuffed that if they put the old system back it would be a ten fold improvement.

So, how much of that has been worked on so far on this term, and how much of what has been worked on so far this term has been "nullsec only content"?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Frying Doom
#997 - 2012-11-21 10:42:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
6 moths would be a tad silly and players should have a fair knowledge after 3 with the ablity to make an informed vote.

Let's make sure we're just getting people who are properly enthusiastic about voting, shall we?

Enthusiasm has nothing to do with it it is just closing a wound on the voting system.
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Me personally my top 3 are

  1. POs's
  2. Corporate Management
  3. Null sec

In that order but as I am part of a minority as well I presume the Majority would argue with me as I am sure Mission runners would like some new missions as repeating the current set over and over is enough to want to make you kill yourself.
Also I am sure the lo-sec guys will tell you it is lo-sec and FW still needing a lot more work

And lets not forget War decs, so unbelievable stuffed that if they put the old system back it would be a ten fold improvement.

So, how much of that has been worked on so far on this term, and how much of what has been worked on so far this term has been "nullsec only content"?

Yes sweet bugger all but that was not due to CSM 6 or CSM 7, CCP practically filtered out their Null sec requests and went for a lot of other things they pushed for (Well individuals pushed for mostly, FW being the big winner there). As to POS and corp management they are in the coming soon but closer than Null pile.

From what was said by the CSM Null sec has now moved to the coming soon somewhere on the road map mark. Personally i would like to see it fixed but it has been stuffed so many times and some of these due to CSM ideas that it has not gotten the perception of beating a dead horse.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#998 - 2012-11-21 11:46:25 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Enthusiasm has nothing to do with it it is just closing a wound on the voting system.

You wanted it closed, let's do it properly, then. 6 months.

Frying Doom wrote:
Yes sweet bugger all but that was not due to CSM 6 or CSM 7, CCP practically filtered out their Null sec requests and went for a lot of other things they pushed for (Well individuals pushed for mostly, FW being the big winner there). As to POS and corp management they are in the coming soon but closer than Null pile.

From what was said by the CSM Null sec has now moved to the coming soon somewhere on the road map mark. Personally i would like to see it fixed but it has been stuffed so many times and some of these due to CSM ideas that it has not gotten the perception of beating a dead horse.

So if the CSM having a few people from nullsec alliances hasn't gotten CCP to focus squarely on nullsec, what's the problem? Why ***** about how the CSM is a "null sec joke"?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Ghazu
#999 - 2012-11-21 11:49:16 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Enthusiasm has nothing to do with it it is just closing a wound on the voting system.

You wanted it closed, let's do it properly, then. 6 months.

Frying Doom wrote:
Yes sweet bugger all but that was not due to CSM 6 or CSM 7, CCP practically filtered out their Null sec requests and went for a lot of other things they pushed for (Well individuals pushed for mostly, FW being the big winner there). As to POS and corp management they are in the coming soon but closer than Null pile.

From what was said by the CSM Null sec has now moved to the coming soon somewhere on the road map mark. Personally i would like to see it fixed but it has been stuffed so many times and some of these due to CSM ideas that it has not gotten the perception of beating a dead horse.

So if the CSM having a few people from nullsec alliances hasn't gotten CCP to focus squarely on nullsec, what's the problem? Why ***** about how the CSM is a "null sec joke"?

because openthedoor

Issler

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984
Frying Doom
#1000 - 2012-11-21 11:55:04 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Enthusiasm has nothing to do with it it is just closing a wound on the voting system.

You wanted it closed, let's do it properly, then. 6 months.

Frying Doom wrote:
Yes sweet bugger all but that was not due to CSM 6 or CSM 7, CCP practically filtered out their Null sec requests and went for a lot of other things they pushed for (Well individuals pushed for mostly, FW being the big winner there). As to POS and corp management they are in the coming soon but closer than Null pile.

From what was said by the CSM Null sec has now moved to the coming soon somewhere on the road map mark. Personally i would like to see it fixed but it has been stuffed so many times and some of these due to CSM ideas that it has not gotten the perception of beating a dead horse.

So if the CSM having a few people from nullsec alliances hasn't gotten CCP to focus squarely on nullsec, what's the problem? Why ***** about how the CSM is a "null sec joke"?

Because it acting like a Null sec lobby is not doing much for the CSM its self and really is minimalising its role and usefulness to the community.

Although it has managed to achieve in areas where it is has some members like mining and FW these are not the areas that the CSM as a whole push. So if it wishes to be a community representative it needs to act like one not just a Null lobby with some rouge agents that manage to get things done.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!