These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why your CSM8 vote doesn't matter...

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#181 - 2013-04-08 02:25:45 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

I am very aware these forums are not representative of EvE as a whole.


Then don't site it as a source M`kay? It makes you look stupid. K, thx. Kisses.

Actually I will, as I said the forums are mostly hardcore players and a percentage of these have only 1 account.

Maybe you could site any facts at all rather than just making things up.



Please, define this "hardcore" player that you speak of. After you explain what hardcore players are, I would like to see some literature clearly defining how they only have one account, and some statistics as to whether or not having one players a role in said "hardcoreness".

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Frying Doom
#182 - 2013-04-08 02:28:07 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

I am very aware these forums are not representative of EvE as a whole.


Then don't site it as a source M`kay? It makes you look stupid. K, thx. Kisses.

Actually I will, as I said the forums are mostly hardcore players and a percentage of these have only 1 account.

Maybe you could site any facts at all rather than just making things up.



Please, define this "hardcore" player that you speak of. After you explain what hardcore players are, I would like to see some literature clearly defining how they only have one account, and some statistics as to whether or not having one players a role in said "hardcoreness".

Actually I am using a very loose term on that, to mean someone who cares about more than just loading the game and playing, and someone who plays more than a few hours a week.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#183 - 2013-04-08 02:28:13 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

Made Snow Axe angry Lol

When you get war decd then it means he is angryEvil



Here let me help. **** you snow axe and the pansy ass horse that your fail alt wardec corp/alt suicide ganking corp rode in on. Come and gank my freighter, this is my main. I am currently residing in Jita.



There. Now I made it easier.

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Frying Doom
#184 - 2013-04-08 02:31:17 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

Made Snow Axe angry Lol

When you get war decd then it means he is angryEvil



Here let me help. **** you snow axe and the pansy ass horse that your fail alt wardec corp/alt suicide ganking corp rode in on. Come and gank my freighter, this is my main. I am currently residing in Jita.



There. Now I made it easier.

Barely, thats a slight not an insult.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#185 - 2013-04-08 02:31:58 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

Actually I am using a very loose term on that, to mean someone who cares about more than just loading the game and playing, and someone who plays more than a few hours a week.


You seem to be using allot of "loose" terms that can mean anything you want them to mean as this thread progresses. If you strengthen your debate skills you will no longer need to use "loose" terms as often. Clarity makes for a better debate.

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Frying Doom
#186 - 2013-04-08 02:34:35 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

Actually I am using a very loose term on that, to mean someone who cares about more than just loading the game and playing, and someone who plays more than a few hours a week.


You seem to be using allot of "loose" terms that can mean anything you want them to mean as this thread progresses. If you strengthen your debate skills you will no longer need to use "loose" terms as often. Clarity makes for a better debate.

Well how about this then "If you don't vote, you are a bunch of Null sec wanna bees"

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Ivoto
A Blessed Bean
Pandemic Horde
#187 - 2013-04-08 02:37:54 UTC
Vote Mangala!

Other than him, vote for whoever has the sexiest avatar.

I find it awful that the power blocks can use the CSM to their advantage, and come across as complete asshats in doing so. Id like for CCP to move all winners into a "CSM Corp" and limit their involvement with their corporations, which would hopefully make them focus on bettering the game overall, instead of the part which benefits them.
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#188 - 2013-04-08 02:39:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Eternum Praetorian
@Doom

That does not even make sense. In fact, it is barely cohesive when compared to the rest of the statements made by both myself and others in this thread thus far.

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#189 - 2013-04-08 02:39:56 UTC
Ivoto wrote:
Vote Mangala!

Other than him, vote for whoever has the sexiest avatar.

I find it awful that the power blocks can use the CSM to their advantage, and come across as complete asshats in doing so. Id like for CCP to move all winners into a "CSM Corp" and limit their involvement with their corporations, which would hopefully make them focus on bettering the game overall, instead of the part which benefits them.



Make this man a CSM. Now that is a splendid idea. He would get my vote.

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Frying Doom
#190 - 2013-04-08 02:42:08 UTC
Ivoto wrote:
Vote Mangala!

Other than him, vote for whoever has the sexiest avatar.

I find it awful that the power blocks can use the CSM to their advantage, and come across as complete asshats in doing so. Id like for CCP to move all winners into a "CSM Corp" and limit their involvement with their corporations, which would hopefully make them focus on bettering the game overall, instead of the part which benefits them.

Well look at all the backing the Null candidates have gotten this year with the STV system, all their alliance members and all the non-voting scum. They are going to sweep the CSM, with at least 8 candidates.

Meaning that the CSM chairman will also be from Null sec.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#191 - 2013-04-08 02:43:51 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Ivoto wrote:
Vote Mangala!

Other than him, vote for whoever has the sexiest avatar.

I find it awful that the power blocks can use the CSM to their advantage, and come across as complete asshats in doing so. Id like for CCP to move all winners into a "CSM Corp" and limit their involvement with their corporations, which would hopefully make them focus on bettering the game overall, instead of the part which benefits them.

Well look at all the backing the Null candidates have gotten this year with the STV system, all their alliance members and all the non-voting scum. They are going to sweep the CSM, with at least 8 candidates.

Meaning that the CSM chairman will also be from Null sec.



Which is a new phenomena because?

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Frying Doom
#192 - 2013-04-08 02:45:50 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Ivoto wrote:
Vote Mangala!

Other than him, vote for whoever has the sexiest avatar.

I find it awful that the power blocks can use the CSM to their advantage, and come across as complete asshats in doing so. Id like for CCP to move all winners into a "CSM Corp" and limit their involvement with their corporations, which would hopefully make them focus on bettering the game overall, instead of the part which benefits them.

Well look at all the backing the Null candidates have gotten this year with the STV system, all their alliance members and all the non-voting scum. They are going to sweep the CSM, with at least 8 candidates.

Meaning that the CSM chairman will also be from Null sec.



Which is a new phenomena because?

A minimum of 8 members on the CSM. With the ability for them to block out others from important discussions, then have them classed as non-productive......wonder could you tell me when this has happened before?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#193 - 2013-04-08 02:47:24 UTC
You're not making sense again. Are you asking me if Null sec representatives have swept the CSM before?

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Frying Doom
#194 - 2013-04-08 02:47:56 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
@Doom

That does not even make sense. In fact, it is barely cohesive when compared to the rest of the statements made by both myself and others in this thread thus far.

It is an STV election
That means by not voting you are lowering the votes required to get elected. as the majority of voters atm are from NULL, your not voting is having the same effect as if you voted Null.

So non-voters = Null wanna bees.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#195 - 2013-04-08 02:50:29 UTC
Then the outcome will be exactly the same as it has been for the past couple of years won't it?

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Frying Doom
#196 - 2013-04-08 02:52:36 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Then the outcome will be exactly the same as it has been for the past couple of years won't it?

Yes and for exactly the same reasons.

non-voters love null csms.

Well at least you guys can spend another year not complaining about the CSM you endorsed.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#197 - 2013-04-08 02:59:39 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Then the outcome will be exactly the same as it has been for the past couple of years won't it?

Yes and for exactly the same reasons.

non-voters love null csms.

Well at least you guys can spend another year not complaining about the CSM you endorsed.



**** that jazz. The past few years have demonstrated that the alt army that major null sec alliances have openly admitted to activating, solely for the purpose of manipulating the CSM vote wins by a landslide. Now that CCP has instituted this new "fix" to the old voting system, it will be even easier for these null sec focus groups to achieve their desired representatives.


CCP has made it harder to keep the null sec guys from dominating everything. It is even worse this year then it was the year before. In true CCP fashion, they tried to buff something and ended up breaking it even worse, without ever addressing the true root of the problem.

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Frying Doom
#198 - 2013-04-08 03:02:34 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Then the outcome will be exactly the same as it has been for the past couple of years won't it?

Yes and for exactly the same reasons.

non-voters love null csms.

Well at least you guys can spend another year not complaining about the CSM you endorsed.



**** that jazz. The past few years have demonstrated that the alt army that major null sec alliances have openly admitted to activating, solely for the purpose of manipulating the CSM vote wins by a landslide. Now that CCP has instituted this new "fix" to the old voting system, it will be even easier for these null sec focus groups to achieve their desired representatives.


CCP has made it harder to keep the null sec guys from dominating everything. It is even worse this year then it was the year before. In true CCP fashion, they tried to buff something and ended up breaking it even worse, without ever addressing the true root of the problem.

Yes and as before the small percentage of Null votes compared to the number of accounts in EvE is tiny.

So if people voted they would be insignificant.

So the only logical reasons people do not vote are:
1) They don't know the CSM exists
2) They love their Null CSM overlords.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#199 - 2013-04-08 03:09:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Eternum Praetorian
Frying Doom wrote:


So the only logical reasons people do not vote are:
1) They don't know the CSM exists
2) They love their Null CSM overlords.



3. Null sec people tend to have allot more accounts then the people in empire do.
4. Empire people have learned not to give a damn about null sec
5. Mission runners have got the hint that CCP, CSM's and null sec people seem to have it out for them.
6. Empire miners just want to mine in peace and relax after a long day of work. So vote for what?
7. Null sec is filled with a handful of alliances, empire is filled with countless corporations. Why one can pool more votes in a single direction is obvious.
8. People don't really think that the CSM can do anything for them.
9. People don't really "get" what the CSM is supposed to be.
10. Goonswarm goes to great lengths to portray themselves as a badguy in game, ironically people start to believe it and alternatively they start to believe that badguys now own the CSM. Simple political logic, not rocket science.

And most importantly number 11. When someone logs in after they come home from work all they want to do is play a ******* game that they pay money for. They don't want to vote. It's a game.




I have more but I guess I can stop here. Your stupid is showing sir. I suggest that you zip up.

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Frying Doom
#200 - 2013-04-08 03:13:46 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:


So the only logical reasons people do not vote are:
1) They don't know the CSM exists
2) They love their Null CSM overlords.



3. Null sec people tend to have allot more accounts then the people in empire do.
4. Empire people have learned not to give a damn about null sec
5. Mission runners have got the hint that CCP, CSM's and null sec people seem to have it out for them.
6. Empire miners just want to mine in peace and relax after a long day of work. So vote for what?
7. Null sec is filled with a handful of alliances, empire is filled with countless corporations. Why one can pool more votes in a single direction is obvious.
8. People don't really think that the CSM can do anything for them.
9. People don't really "get" what the CSM is supposed to be.
10. Goonswarm goes to great lengths to portray themselves as a badguy in game, ironically people start to believe it and alternatively they start to believe that badguys now own the CSM. Simple political logic, not rocket science.

And most importantly number 11. When someone logs in after they come home from work all they want to do is play a ******* game that they pay money for. They don't want to vote. It's a game.




I have more but I guess I can stop here. Your stupid is showing sir. I suggest that you zip up.

None of those are logical reasons why people would not vote but I did miss one
3) The person is mentally disabled or has suffered brain damage.

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