These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Trebor Daehdoow for CSM8 - The Proven Performer - http://bit.ly/vote-trebor

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#161 - 2013-03-04 02:27:17 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

Well as we are only 1 month today off the main polls opening and so far nothing about the CSM to the general populous has been seen, I will admit I think this election is going to be a flop.

On the other side of that the Test state of the Alliance speech apparently has named only one official TEST candidate, Banlish. On reading that I immediately thought their might be some sun shine at the end of this crap Trebor influenced setup if the Null alliances just stay dumb.

Well that are here is hoping very few candidates get the base 200 pre votes to allow for a more varied field.

But having said that I noticed the old reactivate an old account loop hole was not closed, so I think that pretty much sums it up CCPs bottom line over the players voice.


Well I have seen two CSM related things so far but I know what ya mean.

Also to take into consideration is that the EVE players hate spam, so it could backfire on CCP or anyone who tries to spam the CSM event to the players, making it harder to get the word out.

Yeah the TEST thing is interesting, I just wish I knew more about TEST so its hard to comment much.

The goons do seem funner or could be more interesting this election.

It seems the rank and file or grunt goons really like the idea of spamming the CSM with lots of goon or null candidates. But the goon leadership or serious ones, might not find that idea too appealing. So it could be some fun drama.

Oh well who cares about that loophole anyhow. PLEX always had that loophole, but no one every abused it, until the Faction warfare, semi exploitation started up. So its hard to know how the old account loop hole will be exploited.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Vince Snetterton
#162 - 2013-03-04 03:38:47 UTC
rodyas wrote:
Vince Snetterton wrote:


It appears you may be the only voice of sanity on this CSM which will have a mandate to drive high sec income potential to dust.
How do you plan on fighting that?


Sorry to not be one of your beloved communicators, but I am curious.

How do you use hi sec at the moment. Or what play style(s) are you afraid the null people will destroy?

Do you like being high SP, and like having a place all to yourself?

Is it the safety?

Just the casual play style it encourages? Or the casual play style it can have til you feel prepared to embark on a different path?

Is it how hi sec has fun activities for people to enjoy, and compared to how hard, dangerous or ****** the activities are in low or null and WH, you want to stay in hi sec and not see much change?

Or are you just a new/young player or just enjoy the new/young corp play style right now?

Or just another reason?


I am not running, and I am not going to sidetrack a CSM's candidate thread with a discussion of how I play the game. But the writing is on the wall, and the massive, highly disciplined voting bloc of null sec WILL dominate the CSM in a way never seen before.

Hence it is critical there is a contrary voice on the CSM, that can try to slow down the juggernaut bent on destroying high sec income potential. I am hoping Trebor, who is highly respected, will be the voice of reason, though it is likely a futile effort.

I have been following closely the podcasts on Zebra Crossings and reading through these CSM candidacy threads. I see no high sec candidate, or at least a strong one. I was hoping that Trebor could at least fill that role, even though he is not a specific high sec candidate. I am not at this point sure he is that candidate, though I recognize he is considered an outstanding CSM rep, and since he may be the ONLY returning rep, he is needed for continuity, at the very least.
Vince Snetterton
#163 - 2013-03-04 04:46:59 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:

It is an absolute guarantee that any CSM delegate is going to be serving with other delegates with views that are often very different. This is not a bad thing -- it is actually essential!

I have at times disagreed with many CSM delegates whom I think did an outstanding job. As long as a delegate is willing to stay engaged, advocate his position vigorously but fairly, and do his/her share of the chores, it's not a problem.

People who don't take the job seriously, or don't work with the group, basically edit themselves out of the process.

The worker bees, on the other hand, have influence in direct proportion to the merits of their positions and their skill is arguing them. And there will be times when someone you might consider a "nutbar" will be either correct, or provide a perspective that leads to an unexpected place.

Finally, while I appreciate your passion (make sure you and your friends vote!), I think you're being a little hard on mynnna and Malcanis. My experience has been that Goon CSMs have a track record of being hard-working, effective, and professional. And as for Malcanis, he's a level-headed guy whom I've been trying to sucker into running for years.


I do not share your optimism for a fair representation of the different views of this game. While I agree with your idea that people with widely differing views on the game can create something better if they are respectful and tolerant, I fear that will not be the case with this CSM. I fear that in the upcoming CSM there will be a near homogeneous hatred of high sec, with virtually all members united in destroying it. If you try to be the voice of reason, you will be trampled.

And through past actions, I also envision a certain group of decision-makers welcoming this opportunity to wipe out high sec as it is today. When soundwave is quoted as wanting to wipe out high sec T2 mfg https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1230077#post1230077 and Fozzie stating that anyone who does not vote is not worth the dev's attention https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2677400#post2677400, it does not bode well for high sec in the coming 2 releases.

I don't think the worker bee concept will work with this particular CSM. In nature if you are the only bee in the colony working counter to the rest of the colony, the other bees will drive you out, or kill you.
When the HBC/CFC/Russians place 10 of the 14, wh's 1-2, low sec 1-2, and high sec zero, a bee saying "hey, maybe this thing is not good for the silent majority of the game", is in for real trouble.

And lastly, my disdain for mynna and Malcanis is well-earned. I have read an abundant amount of their posts describing their antipathy for high sec, couching it in the tired old terms "rebalance" and "risk vs reward".

Other people have used this analogy on the forums, and I find it appropriate. Using the american political theatre as an example, if people like james315 are the tea party, then mynna and Malcanis are the mitt romneys, the moderates. As they are used by the right wing in the states to shift the entire political spectrum to the right, so do the goons/test/null sec zealots use extreme candidates with whacko ideas as someone with who to compare "moderate" candidates as people of reason, of compromise.

Ultimately, the plan is to hammer high sec, though not as much as the james315's says it should be. james315 wants a complete abolishment, so mynna will counter with only a 75% reduction in high sec income, and say that is reaching a fair balance. And the CCP dev's who already have already started the dismantlement of high sec (Incursions nerfed, missions nerfed, datacores nerfed) will nod their heads and say sagely, "yes, the CSM has come up with a wise compromise." Of course, it is exceedingly convenient that no high sec voices are there to say that it is already balanced. It is equally convenient that CCP has refused for months to provide any numbers regarding income distribution in the various areas of the game, thereby an opinion held by the vast majority of the CSM can pass as fact and be acted on accordingly.

So Trebor, I wish you all the luck to stop this abomination, but I don't think you can.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#164 - 2013-03-04 04:47:58 UTC
Vince Snetterton wrote:

I am not running, and I am not going to sidetrack a CSM's candidate thread with a discussion of how I play the game. But the writing is on the wall, and the massive, highly disciplined voting bloc of null sec WILL dominate the CSM in a way never seen before.


And yet part of the purpose of the CSM is advocacy for the players. Advocating for the players means knowing how they play or would like to play the game. A council member cannot know how you play or would like to play the game unless you tell them, which makes it exactly the sort of discussion you should have here.

I mean, to you I'm one of "them" so maybe you don't want to hear it from me, but many others would tell you the same thing.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Vince Snetterton
#165 - 2013-03-04 05:18:27 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Vince Snetterton wrote:

I am not running, and I am not going to sidetrack a CSM's candidate thread with a discussion of how I play the game. But the writing is on the wall, and the massive, highly disciplined voting bloc of null sec WILL dominate the CSM in a way never seen before.


And yet part of the purpose of the CSM is advocacy for the players. Advocating for the players means knowing how they play or would like to play the game. A council member cannot know how you play or would like to play the game unless you tell them, which makes it exactly the sort of discussion you should have here.

I mean, to you I'm one of "them" so maybe you don't want to hear it from me, but many others would tell you the same thing.


All right, I will respond to you this one time in Trebor's thread.
I have read your comments to the innumerable high sec players who protested your comments and ideas about attacking high sec in the 110 page threadnaught CCP finally shut down. I read how you brushed of their protests as inconsequential, and their right to play the game as it is today as a ridiculous idea.

So don't try now to play yourself as one who wishes to know how the silent majority play this game, and are concerned for their welfare in Eve.

Yes, you are indeed "one of them".
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#166 - 2013-03-04 05:26:50 UTC
Vince Snetterton wrote:


Other people have used this analogy on the forums, and I find it appropriate. Using the american political theatre as an example, if people like james315 are the tea party, then mynna and Malcanis are the mitt romneys, the moderates. As they are used by the right wing in the states to shift the entire political spectrum to the right, so do the goons/test/null sec zealots use extreme candidates with whacko ideas as someone with who to compare "moderate" candidates as people of reason, of compromise.


So Trebor, I wish you all the luck to stop this abomination, but I don't think you can.


So your trying to turn Trebor, into Barack Obama?

Who would CCP be in this story?

Suppose the EULA would be the constitution.

Besides in the example you gave, most of them failed anyhow, be best to choose a better example. Perhaps one that wins.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#167 - 2013-03-04 05:28:40 UTC
Vince Snetterton wrote:


So don't try now to play yourself as one who wishes to know how the silent majority play this game, and are concerned for their welfare in Eve.

Whatever you think of my opinions here is irrelevant - my point was that if you want Trebor to be an advocate for you and players who share your playstyle, you need to tell him how you play or would like to play. And similarly, you need to encourage them to get out and vote for him as well.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#168 - 2013-03-04 05:41:07 UTC
Vince Snetterton wrote:

I am not running, and I am not going to sidetrack a CSM's candidate thread with a discussion of how I play the game. But the writing is on the wall, and the massive, highly disciplined voting bloc of null sec WILL dominate the CSM in a way never seen before.

Hence it is critical there is a contrary voice on the CSM, that can try to slow down the juggernaut bent on destroying high sec income potential. I am hoping Trebor, who is highly respected, will be the voice of reason, though it is likely a futile effort.

I have been following closely the podcasts on Zebra Crossings and reading through these CSM candidacy threads. I see no high sec candidate, or at least a strong one. I was hoping that Trebor could at least fill that role, even though he is not a specific high sec candidate. I am not at this point sure he is that candidate, though I recognize he is considered an outstanding CSM rep, and since he may be the ONLY returning rep, he is needed for continuity, at the very least.


Well I suppose its fair to bring paranoia and fear to Trebor's thread. But God forbid you post anything helpful or constructive.

Maybe you should go bust out some roids and missions while AFK, until you can think of something positive to say.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Cactusfrankie
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#169 - 2013-03-04 06:07:55 UTC
Vince Snetterton wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Vince Snetterton wrote:

I am not running, and I am not going to sidetrack a CSM's candidate thread with a discussion of how I play the game. But the writing is on the wall, and the massive, highly disciplined voting bloc of null sec WILL dominate the CSM in a way never seen before.


And yet part of the purpose of the CSM is advocacy for the players. Advocating for the players means knowing how they play or would like to play the game. A council member cannot know how you play or would like to play the game unless you tell them, which makes it exactly the sort of discussion you should have here.

I mean, to you I'm one of "them" so maybe you don't want to hear it from me, but many others would tell you the same thing.


All right, I will respond to you this one time in Trebor's thread.
I have read your comments to the innumerable high sec players who protested your comments and ideas about attacking high sec in the 110 page threadnaught CCP finally shut down. I read how you brushed of their protests as inconsequential, and their right to play the game as it is today as a ridiculous idea.

So don't try now to play yourself as one who wishes to know how the silent majority play this game, and are concerned for their welfare in Eve.

Yes, you are indeed "one of them".

So you are one of those anonymous cowards who doesn't post on the character he plays with, and therefore not relevant to the discussion at all. Got it.
Frying Doom
#170 - 2013-03-04 09:29:30 UTC
Vince Snetterton wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Vince Snetterton wrote:

I am not running, and I am not going to sidetrack a CSM's candidate thread with a discussion of how I play the game. But the writing is on the wall, and the massive, highly disciplined voting bloc of null sec WILL dominate the CSM in a way never seen before.


And yet part of the purpose of the CSM is advocacy for the players. Advocating for the players means knowing how they play or would like to play the game. A council member cannot know how you play or would like to play the game unless you tell them, which makes it exactly the sort of discussion you should have here.

I mean, to you I'm one of "them" so maybe you don't want to hear it from me, but many others would tell you the same thing.


All right, I will respond to you this one time in Trebor's thread.
I have read your comments to the innumerable high sec players who protested your comments and ideas about attacking high sec in the 110 page threadnaught CCP finally shut down. I read how you brushed of their protests as inconsequential, and their right to play the game as it is today as a ridiculous idea.

So don't try now to play yourself as one who wishes to know how the silent majority play this game, and are concerned for their welfare in Eve.

Yes, you are indeed "one of them".

I must be one of them and the thread naught you are talking about I commented over 100 times.

As to the protest comments there were actually few in the 40+ pages I commented in and worse yet the people who did negatively comment could offer no alternative way to restore the risk/ reward to what it should be or as I prefer reward=risk*capital expenditure.

So I will admit i have little time for those (some of who acknowledge that over 50% of the game is broken) but can only say but I don't want to have to change anything.

The reasoning is purely selfish and in doing that they are cutting there own throats without realizing it, for example what happens if you want something different in a few years, well you couldn't have it as your own voice keeps it broken.

Without a meaningful reason for people to go out into other areas of space hi-sec will soon be mined out rapidly after DT leaving nothing for the majority and implant prices and most of the goods in the LP store will decrease in value as no one will want to buy them except for things like the mining foreman mind link implant. Due to the fact that if the games numbers grow but few leave Hi-sec then the want for those goods will decrease per capita.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#171 - 2013-03-04 11:29:43 UTC
Vince Snetterton wrote:
I have been following closely the podcasts on Zebra Crossings and reading through these CSM candidacy threads. I see no high sec candidate, or at least a strong one. I was hoping that Trebor could at least fill that role, even though he is not a specific high sec candidate. I am not at this point sure he is that candidate, though I recognize he is considered an outstanding CSM rep, and since he may be the ONLY returning rep, he is needed for continuity, at the very least.

IMHO there are more than a few candidates that, while not perhaps "hisec" reps, have the interests of the whole game in mind. Malcanis and Ripard Teg are obvious examples.

And also, effective CSM reps don't blindly advocate for the game to be changed to favor their playstyle, because it simply doesn't work. So fears of "nullsec domination" are a little overblown.

That said, I would like to see more good candidates who are primarily hisec-based, in particular ones who do a lot of industry and economic gameplay. I think they would provide perspectives that would make CSM more effective. If you know someone whom you think would do a good job, you should encourage them to run. There isn't really a downside.

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Vince Snetterton
#172 - 2013-03-04 15:03:20 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:


And also, effective CSM reps don't blindly advocate for the game to be changed to favor their playstyle, because it simply doesn't work. So fears of "nullsec domination" are a little overblown.

That said, I would like to see more good candidates who are primarily hisec-based, in particular ones who do a lot of industry and economic gameplay. I think they would provide perspectives that would make CSM more effective. If you know someone whom you think would do a good job, you should encourage them to run. There isn't really a downside.


Let's hope you are right, but this CSM will be a whole new paradigm, with it being virtually all null sec interests represented, and high sec with no one. They don't have to advocate effectively, they just have to advocate, since there will be no opposing voice.

As for good high sec candidates, I know of a few, but they I strongly doubt they would want to run in the face of the adversity thrown up by the null sec voting bloc. I know I would never run based on the constant attacks by the null sec lobby, and I have heard of at least one out-of-game attack on a high sec champion. Plus, with the new voting system, it is virtually impossible to get onto the CSM unless you have a well-organized bloc behind you. If the UNI had a candidate again, they would have a strong chance, perhaps even RvB, but RvB only use high sec as a convenient stage for their fun fights, and are hardly interested in the other facets of high sec.

The one thing that null sec blocs and I can agree on is that high sec is not organized enough to vote in a co-ordinated bloc. It is the nature of the high sec player to NOT be organized to that level. We accept the trade-off of significantly lower income for the freedom to play the game free of the tyranny of the null sec bloc leadership.

High sec players vote with their wallets. In general, they don't even read the forums. They simply say, "the game sucks now", and unsub. But the impact of the attacks on high sec are not known until months after they are perpetrated. Subs don't run out immediately. That is a mechanic that the null sec blocs count on. They can destroy high sec, and have months of gloating and extra profits, and perhaps, even convince CCP that the destruction of high sec was not related to the drop in subs.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#173 - 2013-03-04 17:50:18 UTC
The fear of "high sec is doomed" because of a full slate of null sec carebear haters is naive. If you end up with a bunch of death to high sec CSM members CCP will largely ignore them. You might not always agree with CCP but they aren't insane. They know that having a high sec like we have today accounts for too many subscriptions so they aren't about to turn it into a graveyard.

CCP knows that highsec has enough carrots and doesn't need any more stick, they know that the problem is low and null need a lot more carrots. A smart CSM candidate from those power slates would be wise to focus on the new carrots for areas outside of highsec and not try and take the fun from folks happy where they are. Use the stick on those folks and they don't go to low or null, they go someplace outside of Eve. So if you are running for the CSM 8 on a "some folks are having to much fun and I need to take that fun away" good luck selling CCP on that idea.

If you keep turning the knob towards "dark and evil" soon you'll have devoted and fanatical player base, of course it will only be about 1K folks and their alts. Hard to pay the bills with that.

If you want interesting a new content EVERYWHERE in Eve you want someone that can work WITH CCP, not FOR CCP, if you want someone that can look at the big picture, listen and offer insightful unique ideas with a broad view of ALL of Eve, Trebor has proven he can be that guy. I'd say he is the best I've seen running so far for high sec, low sec and null because he sees that all of those have to be healthy to make the best Eve. I've got to see him work behind those NDA-ed doors and Eve would do well to let him keep on keeping on for the players of Eve in CSM8.

Not even going to sign this post because he is just that good.
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#174 - 2013-03-04 19:14:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
Vince Snetterton wrote:
We accept the trade-off of significantly lower income for the freedom to play the game free of the tyranny of the null sec bloc leadership.


looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool

This thread is an amazing goldmine of no-self-awareness insanity.

"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["
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#175 - 2013-03-04 19:38:11 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Vince Snetterton wrote:
We accept the trade-off of significantly lower income for the freedom to play the game free of the tyranny of the null sec bloc leadership.


looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool

This thread is an amazing goldmine of no-self-awareness insanity.


It is worth pointing out that this is Trebor's thread, and he is certainly well aware of the broken risk-reward issues throughout the entire game. I'll let him speak for himself, but please don't confuse random posters' opinions for Trebor's.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#176 - 2013-03-04 19:43:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
Two step wrote:
It is worth pointing out that this is Trebor's thread, and he is certainly well aware of the broken risk-reward issues throughout the entire game. I'll let him speak for himself, but please don't confuse random posters' opinions for Trebor's.


He's free to shoot them down if he disagreees vOv


vvvvv see? Just like that! He's a big boy, Two Step :)

"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["
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#177 - 2013-03-04 20:41:11 UTC
Vince Snetterton wrote:
As for good high sec candidates, I know of a few, but they I strongly doubt they would want to run in the face of the adversity thrown up by the null sec voting bloc. I know I would never run based on the constant attacks by the null sec lobby, and I have heard of at least one out-of-game attack on a high sec champion.

I had some renowned forum warriors trolling me during the CSM 6 elections, and came out none the worse for wear -- if anything, it got me more votes. Bottom line, if you can't take the heat during the election, how are you going to be able to handle it when a certain CCP dev (who will remain nameless because, quite frankly, I'm afraid she'll beat me up at FanFest) trolls you in the CSM internal forums?

Quote:
Plus, with the new voting system, it is virtually impossible to get onto the CSM unless you have a well-organized bloc behind you.

I disagree. It is now much easier for candidates who are broadly considered to be reasonable choice, but perhaps do not have deep support from a particular in-game group, to get elected. It's all about getting other candidates to recommend you to their voters. Further, you should not discount the value of running simply as a platform to spur discussion of topics that you think are important. That's why I ran the first time; I had no expectation of getting elected, and when CCP Xhagen emailed me that I had succeeded, my initial reaction was that the email was a fake.

Quote:
The one thing that null sec blocs and I can agree on is that high sec is not organized enough to vote in a co-ordinated bloc. It is the nature of the high sec player to NOT be organized to that level. We accept the trade-off of significantly lower income for the freedom to play the game free of the tyranny of the null sec bloc leadership.

Then you should love the STV election system, because it gives unorganized groups the ability to organically and automatically coordinate their voting almost as well as the organized groups. All you have to do is (a) give them good candidates to vote for and (b) work to get out the vote.

Quote:
High sec players vote with their wallets. In general, they don't even read the forums. They simply say, "the game sucks now", and unsub. But the impact of the attacks on high sec are not known until months after they are perpetrated.

All the more reason to get people on the CSM who will push CCP to look at the actual data and demographics and base their decisions on hard facts instead of dogma.

tl/dr: if you really care about something, get off your ass and do something about it.

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Frying Doom
#178 - 2013-03-04 22:28:38 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Then you should love the STV election system, because it gives unorganized groups the ability to organically and automatically coordinate their voting almost as well as the organized groups. All you have to do is (a) give them good candidates to vote for and (b) work to get out the vote.

It does do that fairly well in the real world, in countries like Australia where voting is compulsory, I do not however think it will do so well when voting is not.

Take the Australian senate that uses a similar system

Total 76 seats.

Government (31)
Labor (31)

Opposition
Coalition (34)

Liberal (24)
LNP (6)
Nationals (3)
CLP (1)

Crossbench (11)

Greens (9)
DLP (1)
Independent (1)

So out of 76 seats 74 seats went to the two major parties/coalitions and to one minor party off the less organized parties/individual went 2 seats, this being in a compulsory voting system. So if we shrink that to fit the CSM an unorganized candidate will be lucky to sit in one seat, even if we include the smaller parties of the coalition they would have 2.

but I will admit while a similar voting system it is not the same as each state elects the same number of senators. This means there is equal representation for each of the Australian states, regardless of population, so the Senate like many upper houses does not adhere to the principle of "one vote one value".

But the principle still stands that this system allows organized voters to gain the upper hand with the difference being that some minor candidates have some possibility of being elected.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Shadow Cartel
#179 - 2013-03-05 00:10:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Alekseyev Karrde
Frying Doom wrote:

But the principle still stands that this system allows organized voters to gain the upper hand with the difference being that some minor candidates have some possibility of being elected.

>implying the old one didnt

Also, in general,

>implying all candidates from highsec are weak willed introverts ignorant of the larger game balance
>implying all highsec-based voters are weak willed introverts ignorant of the larger game balance

Alek the Kidnapper, Hero of the CSM
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#180 - 2013-03-05 00:26:43 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
But the principle still stands that this system allows organized voters to gain the upper hand with the difference being that some minor candidates have some possibility of being elected.

So what you're saying is that the new voting system does not, and never was intended to, fix the problem that the composition of the voting populace does not actually represent the populace of the game as a whole and that achieving that goal has nothing to do with the voting system used whatsoever?


Shocked

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal