EVE General Discussion

Quite a few people have posted in blogs the dangers of the new voting process CCP is implementing, which cater precisely to the large, organized null sec blocs.

Assuming that 4000 votes is the magic number to get on the CSM (it is actually much, much less in the last 4 or 5 spots), we are faced with the real possibility that null sec will place 10-12 of the 14 slots, with wormholes placing 1-2, low sec maybe 1, and high sec shut out.

Test and goons total 21,000 chars, which translates to between 10 and 15,000 accounts.
Now add on all their alt accounts.
Now tack on all the other alliances within HBC and CFC.
Now tack on all the other alliances' alt accounts.

We are faced with an organized voting bloc of, best guess, 25,000 - 40,000 accounts.
( I know one guy in PL who has 7 accounts, and I don't think he is an aberration.)

Given that these guys will distribute a list of 14 candidates, in the precise order that they should be voted on, it is a lock that the first 7 of the first 10 spots are filled with precisely who they want.

Wormholes guys are likely organized enough to get their primary candidate in the top 7.
Low sec, I have no idea how organized how they are, but I can't imagine they will get more than one.

High sec, we all know, is not nearly organized enough to pull off getting even one person in the top position on the voting list of 4000 voters. Eve UNi has roughly 2000 potential votes, but not sure if they are even endorsing anyone since Kelduum is not running.

So well done CCP, I look forward to the nerfing of high sec starting with the May release.

By December I expect to see :
Perfect refine no longer possible in high sec.
Superveld and superscordite in null sec destroying the value of high sec mining.
Incursion income reduced by 75%.
Mission income halved (on top of the devastation that occurred with the AI and TD changes in Dec.
T2 manufacturing removed from high sec
Manufacturing slots at high sec stations severely curtailed or completely removed. Not that it will matter much.

These are all ideas proposed by various null sec zealots within the last 6 months on the forums and with their podcasts on Crossing Zebras, and the last one has been proposed by both soundwave and greyscale. It appears with a virtually unanimous voice on the CSM, many, if not all of these proposals will be pushed hard at CCP by the CSM.

Why CCP, are you moving to a voting system that caters to the massive voting blocs in null?

This is as it should be. Perhaps you can organize high-sec?

You guys wanted the voting system changed. This is what you get, a fair system that disenfranchises no one.

Time to reap what you sow.

As a highsec dweller I'm perfectly fine with this. Nobody keeps you from organizing highsec and especially coming up with a suitable candidate.

If the voting blocks were that massive, then they can already influence CCP by threatening to unsub en masse.

Given the huge carebear population in high-sec, it's not likely that CCP will risk losing carebear subs either.

CCP will use the CSM's experience and input to make the game better. And given the low voter turnout for the previous CSM, I don't think CCP will ignore the non-voting population's "wishes".

tl;dr - follow the money

[1] 16.63%

Alliances already organize block voting. In the new system you don't need to be a highly organized entity to do this anymore, so while all groups benefit from it, it's the less organized ones who gain more from it. Now there is a good chance that all large blocks can at least get a single candidate through without being higly organized or having a high degree of co-operation.

The CSM also isn't a governing entity. It can't decide anything on it's own. Even if a single block got all the seats, they couldn't force any decisions through. If anything it would likely mean, that CCP would devote less emphasis on it, since the obvious bias in representation. Unlike some people here seem to think, people working at CCP are highly capable smart people. They're not automatons who will swallow all the stupid **** CSM happens to shovel their way.

I think you badly underestimate the hatred that many of the CSM candidates (and I imagine quite a few of the devs and game designers who were recruited from null sec) have for high sec.

Go to Crossing Zebra's podcasts, and listen to James315. The interviewer thought he was a loon, and I agree.
He was a fringe candidate, at best. Now, with the new voting system, he could be a lock, if the goons (this clown says he is ex-goons on the podcast) want him on the CSM.

Personally the per account voting is what I don't like. Don't think someone with 200 accounts should get any more say than someone with 1... but I suppose its tricky to set it up any other way. Without pretty much blocking out people under the same household.

Because of all the highsec whinging about how the voting system catered to the (supposedly) massive voting blocs in null.

So they picked one that lets the small guy have a better chance by getting in through all the non-wasted votes that STV provides.

Most of those are very good changes. So what's the problem?

Because the power of one person's opinion shouldn't change with how much money they have, or just because they have been playing long enough to PLEX several accounts. Sure they give more money, but their opinion isn't always necessarily the healthier opinion.