These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: CSM8 Elections – Schedule and Election Process

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
CynoNet Two
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#161 - 2013-02-22 12:41:36 UTC
CynoNet Two wrote:
Is there still no change to the policy of revealing candidate real names publically on the Internet? I wonder how many potentially great representatives we're missing out on because they don't want to be e-stalked for blowing up someone's Internet spaceship.

Repeating this for great justice (and also an answer)
spookydonut
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#162 - 2013-02-22 12:45:20 UTC
The fact that the mittani has had real life death threats as a result of his name being public makes a pretty clear case for this.
Destination SkillQueue
Doomheim
#163 - 2013-02-22 12:52:29 UTC
ITT internet spaceships is serious business. Seriously people it's just a game. Low voting numbers here isn't the impending death of the western democracy. If people just want to play a game and ignore all the politics and the elections, let them. They're doing it right.
Aryndel Vyst
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#164 - 2013-02-22 13:07:57 UTC
spookydonut wrote:
The fact that the mittani has had real life death threats as a result of his name being public makes a pretty clear case for this.
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#165 - 2013-02-22 13:08:28 UTC
spookydonut wrote:
The fact that the mittani has had real life death threats as a result of his name being public makes a pretty clear case for this.

"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["
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#166 - 2013-02-22 15:17:18 UTC
spookydonut wrote:
The fact that the mittani has had real life death threats as a result of his name being public makes a pretty clear case for this.

accountability is king.

.
Aryth
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#167 - 2013-02-22 15:45:03 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
But then, if we got the IT guy to find us a solution to a minor issue, and the bigger issue is left unattended or actually is harmed, who's fault is this?


Except in the IT guy's own thread about voting reform, the dominant opinion was that low voter turnout was the real issue that needed fixing, and that the voting system itself wasn't the issue (and could actually be detrimental). In that case, it's not "our" fault at all that the IT guy only wanted a solution that could be coded into a website.


This pretty much sums up what has occurred. I do not believe this is good for EVE or the CSM, but hey, it isn't exactly bad for us (null) either so just going to roll with it.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#168 - 2013-02-22 18:22:07 UTC
Vera Algaert wrote:
spookydonut wrote:
The fact that the mittani has had real life death threats as a result of his name being public makes a pretty clear case for this.

accountability is king.

And never mind the crazy people.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#169 - 2013-02-22 18:24:34 UTC
R0me0 Charl1e wrote:
CCP, has the topic of compulsory voting for the CSM been discussed internally? It may be something to discuss since we are changing the voting system.

I certainly think they should change their approach to make it seem more relevant. As it stands, a LOT of people don't vote because they feel like it doesn't matter.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Chokichi Ozuwara
Perkone
Caldari State
#170 - 2013-02-22 18:48:30 UTC
R0me0 Charl1e wrote:
CCP, has the topic of compulsory voting for the CSM been discussed internally? It may be something to discuss since we are changing the voting system.

Why would it be discussed? It's a horrible idea.

Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round.
Chokichi Ozuwara
Perkone
Caldari State
#171 - 2013-02-22 18:50:28 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
R0me0 Charl1e wrote:
CCP, has the topic of compulsory voting for the CSM been discussed internally? It may be something to discuss since we are changing the voting system.

I certainly think they should change their approach to make it seem more relevant. As it stands, a LOT of people don't vote because they feel like it doesn't matter.

It doesn't matter, and it shouldn't matter. The CSM has no power, and that's a great thing.

As soon as any power accrues to the CSM, you're going to see all of the corruption we get in real life politics. No thanks.

Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#172 - 2013-02-22 20:49:48 UTC
Vera Algaert wrote:
spookydonut wrote:
The fact that the mittani has had real life death threats as a result of his name being public makes a pretty clear case for this.

accountability is king.

i, too, believe accountability is best enforced though people with demonstrable mental problems that should be getting medical care

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#173 - 2013-02-22 20:51:47 UTC
Chokichi Ozuwara wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
R0me0 Charl1e wrote:
CCP, has the topic of compulsory voting for the CSM been discussed internally? It may be something to discuss since we are changing the voting system.

I certainly think they should change their approach to make it seem more relevant. As it stands, a LOT of people don't vote because they feel like it doesn't matter.

It doesn't matter, and it shouldn't matter. The CSM has no power, and that's a great thing.

As soon as any power accrues to the CSM, you're going to see all of the corruption we get in real life politics. No thanks.


You're adorable.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#174 - 2013-02-22 23:24:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Poetic Stanziel
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
One system that isn't feasible is Schulze-STV. While it is a very good counting method, its computational complexity explodes as the number of candidates and seats goes up. A back-of-the-envelope calculation indicates that a Schulze-STV election with 14 seats and 28 candidates would take over 9 years to compute on a decent PC.
Schulze runs in polynomial time, not exponential time.

The Schulze algorithm is a widest path problem. It has a running time of N^3, where N is the number of candidates. It's quite an efficient algorithm for all candidate sizes.

You're way off base here, Trebor. I realize though that your programming experience is circa-1981.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#175 - 2013-02-22 23:26:30 UTC
And "you're" grammer is sub year six.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#176 - 2013-02-22 23:35:26 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
And "you're" grammer is sub year six.
Grammer. Thank you for the lesson.
CCP Veritas
C C P
C C P Alliance
#177 - 2013-02-22 23:47:12 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
One system that isn't feasible is Schulze-STV. While it is a very good counting method, its computational complexity explodes as the number of candidates and seats goes up. A back-of-the-envelope calculation indicates that a Schulze-STV election with 14 seats and 28 candidates would take over 9 years to compute on a decent PC.
Schulze runs in polynomial time, not exponential time.

The Schulze algorithm is a widest path problem. It has a running time of N^3, where N is the number of candidates. It's quite an efficient algorithm for all candidate sizes.

You're way off base here, Trebor. I realize though that your programming experience is circa-1981.

Schulze-STV is different than regular Schulze. They're similar in that they're both path-based, but Schulze-STV is based on all possible group outcomes, making the graph size grow combinatorially.

CCP Veritas - Technical Director - EVE Online
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#178 - 2013-02-23 00:18:45 UTC
CCP Veritas wrote:
Schulze-STV is different than regular Schulze. They're similar in that they're both path-based, but Schulze-STV is based on all possible group outcomes, making the graph size grow combinatorially.
Ah. I stand corrected, then.

http://www.math.duke.edu/~bray/Courses/49s/Additional%20Reading/Schulze/Schulze3/schulze3.pdf

Yeah, I see the issue now. And in samples ... a quarter the CSM's candidate/seat size ran in 1.0 second ... half the CSM's candidate/seat size ran in 4090 seconds ... scaled up to the CSM's requirements ... yeah, Trebor is probably in the ballpark, then.
AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
#179 - 2013-02-23 00:30:52 UTC
I don't like the 'if the guy you picked had enough votes already, you get to vote again' idea. That's obviously catering to the big alliance blocs so that their votes won't be wasted.

I DO like the 'if the guy you picked didn't have enough votes to win, you get to vote again' idea.

As for people crying a river over Alex Gianturco, please stop. Nobody should be harassed irl, but nobody should be running around telling people to 'kill yourself irl' and encouraging people to harass a mentally ill person in an effort to get him to commit suicide, either.

Alex Gianturco behaved terribly, apologized, and was removed from CSM. Drop it already.
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#180 - 2013-02-23 00:58:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Trebor Daehdoow
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Schulze runs in polynomial time, not exponential time.

The Schulze algorithm is a widest path problem. It has a running time of N^3, where N is the number of candidates. It's quite an efficient algorithm for all candidate sizes.

You're way off base here, Trebor.

I'm sorry, but you are incorrect. You are talking about the Schulze Condorcet Algorithm for a single seat election, which is not suitable for a multiple seat election.

For that, you need Schulze-STV. Schulze-STV exhaustively compares all possible quorums to find the best one. As such, it explodes factorially. If you have n candidates and m seats, you need to evaluate n choose m possibilities.

A Schulze-STV election selecting 14 candidates out of 20 requires evaluating 38760 possible results. A test run of this took ~8 minutes or so to execute.

Running last year's election, of 14 candidates out of 40, would require evaluating 23206929840 positions, which would take 598,734 times as long. Even if we can get the code running 100x faster, that's over a month.

tl;dr: I'm sure this will come as a shock to many, and to you in particular, but you don't know what you're talking about.

Quote:
I realize though that your programming experience is circa-1981.

And clearly I knew more about algorithmic complexity then than you do now. Twisted

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery