These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Frying Doom
#601 - 2013-04-14 04:44:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Snow Axe wrote:
STV absolutely fixes #2, as it will definitely ensure a better representation of the actual voters, especially compared to FPTP.

Of course, it avoids a trickier question - will an accurate representation of the current voter base produce a varied, desirable CSM? Unfortunately, that question never got asked, I presume because the voter apathy issue being solved would have taken care of that. It's just pretty typical CCP to tackle the easy part first (the voting system, a solution that can be solved with code) while letting the difficult part (fixing voter apathy) slip to the wayside.

If this would have been handled 100% properly, #1 would have been the prime focus before anyone even looked at #2 (unless the attempt to solve #1 showed that #2 was the problem, which I strongly doubt), but despite every effort to put CCP onto that path in Xhagen's voting reform thread, it never took. It's situations like this that make me wish old CSM communiques and whatnot would be removed from NDA, as I'd kill to see how much talking about this even went on behind the scenes, let alone what direction it went in and who drove it.

STV absolutely fixes #2, but for a more efficient system I am surprised they didn't save the time and just have Trebor vote. It would have been 100% efficient, with no wasted votes at all. Then that way you would know 100% of the voters choices are represented.

But seriously CCP has actually done more this time than it ever has before to increase voter awareness. Personally I think they have stopped a mile before they should, "I voted" Tags on the forums for 12 months would be a great example as were attack ads. I have never seen a RL election where the awareness campaign started a week after the election.

I think fixing this mess will need to be CSM 8s highest priority otherwise by CSM 9, no one will want to vote at all, not even Trebor.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#602 - 2013-04-14 06:45:01 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
So are you prepared to acknowledge yet that STV was a horrible idea, that has caused the most boring election in the History of EvE...


It's not the job of an election to provide entertainment. "Entertaining" elections are generally bad elections, per the old Chinese curse 'May you live in interesting times.'

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#603 - 2013-04-14 06:46:29 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
STV absolutely fixes #2, as it will definitely ensure a better representation of the actual voters, especially compared to FPTP.

Of course, it avoids a trickier question - will an accurate representation of the current voter base produce a varied, desirable CSM? Unfortunately, that question never got asked


I asked it, but unfortunately geeks gonna geek and the point of the question was drowned in talk about "fairness".

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Frying Doom
#604 - 2013-04-14 07:24:29 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
STV absolutely fixes #2, as it will definitely ensure a better representation of the actual voters, especially compared to FPTP.

Of course, it avoids a trickier question - will an accurate representation of the current voter base produce a varied, desirable CSM? Unfortunately, that question never got asked


I asked it, but unfortunately geeks gonna geek and the point of the question was drowned in talk about "fairness".

It is kind of ironic though

In Trebor's fight to minimize the effect of the blocs, he has handed the CSM to them.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#605 - 2013-04-14 08:49:28 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
STV absolutely fixes #2, as it will definitely ensure a better representation of the actual voters, especially compared to FPTP.

Of course, it avoids a trickier question - will an accurate representation of the current voter base produce a varied, desirable CSM? Unfortunately, that question never got asked


I asked it, but unfortunately geeks gonna geek and the point of the question was drowned in talk about "fairness".

It is kind of ironic though

In Trebor's fight to minimize the effect of the blocs, he has handed the CSM to them.


Talking about wise chinese men.

Chinese finger trap.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Friggz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#606 - 2013-04-14 16:59:51 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:


In Trebor's fight to minimize the effect of the blocs, he has handed the CSM to them.



As much as I like Trebor I think you are giving him entirely too much credit here. It's not like CCP came to him and said "Okay Robert, you suggest a change and we'll do it, it's entirely in your hands!" and then Trebor fired a mind control ray at the entire player base to reduce non-bloc turnout (if that actually happens) before retreating to his volcano lair to plot the construction of his doom laser.

The success of failure of this election will be determined by a number of factors. Trebor is just one of them.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#607 - 2013-04-14 17:06:47 UTC
Another example of the impotent PR-stunt CSM's terrible power!

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#608 - 2013-04-14 21:55:43 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Another example of the impotent PR-stunt CSM's terrible power!

Indeed. I do wish people would make up thier minds. I for one would like to finally find out if I'm an impotent tool or a powerful throbbing pillar of influence.

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Frying Doom
#609 - 2013-04-14 22:13:36 UTC
Friggz wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:


In Trebor's fight to minimize the effect of the blocs, he has handed the CSM to them.



As much as I like Trebor I think you are giving him entirely too much credit here. It's not like CCP came to him and said "Okay Robert, you suggest a change and we'll do it, it's entirely in your hands!" and then Trebor fired a mind control ray at the entire player base to reduce non-bloc turnout (if that actually happens) before retreating to his volcano lair to plot the construction of his doom laser.

The success of failure of this election will be determined by a number of factors. Trebor is just one of them.


Did you miss Trebors voting reform thread?

Also did you know CSM6 turned down the STV system, when CCP suggested it to them? Yet when offered to CSM7 some of the members went for it, exactly know I don't know other than Trebor, as Seleene was against it, that I know.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#610 - 2013-04-14 22:14:39 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Another example of the impotent PR-stunt CSM's terrible power!

Indeed. I do wish people would make up thier minds. I for one would like to finally find out if I'm an impotent tool or a powerful throbbing pillar of influence.

Does CCP Stooge count?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Friggz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#611 - 2013-04-15 00:48:56 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Friggz wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:


In Trebor's fight to minimize the effect of the blocs, he has handed the CSM to them.



As much as I like Trebor I think you are giving him entirely too much credit here. It's not like CCP came to him and said "Okay Robert, you suggest a change and we'll do it, it's entirely in your hands!" and then Trebor fired a mind control ray at the entire player base to reduce non-bloc turnout (if that actually happens) before retreating to his volcano lair to plot the construction of his doom laser.

The success of failure of this election will be determined by a number of factors. Trebor is just one of them.


Did you miss Trebors voting reform thread?

Also did you know CSM6 turned down the STV system, when CCP suggested it to them? Yet when offered to CSM7 some of the members went for it, exactly know I don't know other than Trebor, as Seleene was against it, that I know.


I'm just curious, do you actually lack the ability to see the distinction between suggesting or supporting an idea, and being whole responsible for it's implementation? Or are you perhaps joking?
Frying Doom
#612 - 2013-04-15 00:59:15 UTC
Friggz wrote:


I'm just curious, do you actually lack the ability to see the distinction between suggesting or supporting an idea, and being whole responsible for it's implementation? Or are you perhaps joking?

CCP wanted to have an STV voting system CSM 7 let it through, Trebor wanted the brown nose 5, he suggested them and argued for them multiple times.

Whole is responsible for a flood? The water that wants to follow gravity or the guy opening the flood gates?

Trebor was one of those with their hands on the flood gates.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#613 - 2013-04-15 01:05:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
Friggz wrote:
I'm just curious, do you actually lack the ability to see the distinction between suggesting or supporting an idea, and being whole responsible for it's implementation? Or are you perhaps joking?


So hey this is interesting - has Trebor actually denied having any part in CCP choosing STV to you? Or are you just putting words in his mouth?

It'll never happen but some input from the candidate himself on the matter would be nice! Or at the very least talk your boy Friggz down, as he's making you look like you have a rather...curious...interpretation of cause and effect.

"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["
Nathan Jameson
Grumpy Bastards
#614 - 2013-04-15 04:33:25 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Another example of the impotent PR-stunt CSM's terrible power!

Indeed. I do wish people would make up thier minds. I for one would like to finally find out if I'm an impotent tool or a powerful throbbing pillar of influence.


Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them.

If you catch Shakespear's drift. *wink wink*

http://www.wormholes.info
Friggz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#615 - 2013-04-15 04:39:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Friggz
Snow Axe wrote:
Friggz wrote:
I'm just curious, do you actually lack the ability to see the distinction between suggesting or supporting an idea, and being whole responsible for it's implementation? Or are you perhaps joking?


So hey this is interesting - has Trebor actually denied having any part in CCP choosing STV to you? Or are you just putting words in his mouth?

It'll never happen but some input from the candidate himself on the matter would be nice! Or at the very least talk your boy Friggz down, as he's making you look like you have a rather...curious...interpretation of cause and effect.


It's fairly well known Trebor supports the STV system and no one is dying that.

I'm saying there is a difference between supporting an idea and being the person who gets to pull the trigger and make the decision. If it turns out the new voting system is bad Trebor absolutely deserves some of the blame and if it turns out to be good, he deserves some of the credit.

However, to act as if he single handedly made the decision to change the system is disingenuous. The decision involved a lot of people.

I just don't really see what part of this is difficult to understand. I'm not even using big words here. Well, maybe disingenuous.
Frying Doom
#616 - 2013-04-15 05:06:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Friggz wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
Friggz wrote:
I'm just curious, do you actually lack the ability to see the distinction between suggesting or supporting an idea, and being whole responsible for it's implementation? Or are you perhaps joking?


So hey this is interesting - has Trebor actually denied having any part in CCP choosing STV to you? Or are you just putting words in his mouth?

It'll never happen but some input from the candidate himself on the matter would be nice! Or at the very least talk your boy Friggz down, as he's making you look like you have a rather...curious...interpretation of cause and effect.


It's fairly well known Trebor supports the STV system and no one is dying that.

I'm saying there is a difference between supporting an idea and being the person who gets to pull the trigger and make the decision. If it turns out the new voting system is bad Trebor absolutely deserves some of the blame and if it turns out to be good, he deserves some of the credit.

However, to act as if he single handedly made the decision to change the system is disingenuous. The decision involved a lot of people.

I just don't really see what part of this is difficult to understand. I'm not even using big words here. Well, maybe disingenuous.

Given that this CSM election is now the most widely publicized one ever to have occurred, the percentage of voters would need to be in the 25-30% range for it to be classed as a success, and if it is below last years election, I think we can class it as a disaster of monumental proportions.

Lets face it this year we have had splash screens, videos, multiple dev blogs, in game mail spam, the login message for days has been about the CSM election.

As to "the person who gets to pull the trigger and make the decision." Lets look at the minutes.

CSM Minutes, December wrote:
The CSM asked their voting systems consultant, Veritas, for his advice on what system would be best. He replied that he was a big fan of Schulze (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method), however it does have a weakness: organized groups would be able to manipulate elections by running multiple candidates ["ballot-stuffing”, not to be confused with ballot-box-stuffing] and voting for them all.

Veritas: Large alliances have an advantage right now; they have more information than regular voters, and can leverage that information. The hope is to find a system where either that information is harder to get, or less valuable to have. However, a lot of the potential solutions rely on some barrier to getting on the ballot.

Trebor: That was the point of my original proposal; by killing the transferability of overvotes, you blunt the information advantage.


Like I said so worried about the blocs that he has given the CSM, too them. So no he did not pull the trigger but he did sign the contract selling them our land, one of several signatures.

To make matters worse he was on CSM6 and knew the reasons they gave for turning it down.

How about the birth of the brown nose 5?
CSM Minutes, December wrote:
Trebor: Good idea. While I appreciate Two step's concerns about dead weight on the council, I think a lot of those concerns can be addressed by an election system that generates a more representative CSM. I think the average quality will go up, which will deal with some of your concerns. I really strongly believe that someone should not be kicked off the CSM for lack of communication or contribution. Douche-bag though he is, Darius should not be kicked off the CSM unless he breaks the NDA. That said, given the level of non-engagement that he demonstrates, if he somehow scammed his way to the #1 position in the next election, CCP shouldn't have to pay for a plane ticket for him to come to Iceland.

Two step: CSM terms are long now; there's a whole year.

Elise: So the middle ground would be, instead of kicking the non-productive members, only invite the 7 most productive, regardless of their order.

Trebor: The compromise would be, “CCP picks 5, CSM picks 2”. You pick the 5 that you think are the best performers. And if there are 10 hard-workers who are kicking ass and taking names, each of those guys will get to go to a summit. I mean, Alek should have had a trip to Iceland this year. Take Hans here: I was so glad when Kelduum couldn't come, because I was struggling with the decision about not coming, so he could get a seat here -- because he deserved it, he earned it, and he worked for it from before he was even on CSM. You [Hans] proved yourself before you came here, and you've proved yourself here. Alek earned a trip based on what he did at the last summit, attending remotely.

Seleene: Alek wrote a big chunk of that strategy document that got produced over a weekend. [He stepped up].

Trebor: We'll take 2 slots, to fill in with people we think you've overlooked.


So Trebor came up with the idea with the brown nose 5 and Supported the STV, as to to who else supported the STV, I have no idea even after asking multiple times, All I know is that is it was not backed by the Chairman.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#617 - 2013-04-15 07:34:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
Friggz wrote:
It's fairly well known Trebor supports the STV system and no one is dying that.


If he supported STV, why didn't he just propose it in the first place? His own proposal had some pretty major changes to STV (one of which included a conditional removal of the "Transferrable" part for some candidates' votes), so no, I don't think it's true to say that it's "fairly well known" that he actually supports STV. He's never addressed the discrepancy between his proposal and CCP's end versions either (and he won't either. That's lose-lose. Thanks for bringing it up even more though!).

Friggz wrote:
I'm saying there is a difference between supporting an idea and being the person who gets to pull the trigger and make the decision. If it turns out the new voting system is bad Trebor absolutely deserves some of the blame and if it turns out to be good, he deserves some of the credit.


Trebor didn't just "support" the idea, he wrote and publicly posted a very detailed proposal advocating a change to said idea (again, with major changes to actual STV). Nobody else from the CSM really said much one way or the other about it before CCP put their changes through - in fact, one of the party lines in that disaster of a thread of his was that the proposal WASN'T a CSM idea, but a Trebor idea.

So that's where singlehanded comes from. You may not consider it fair, but the CSM's complete lack of endorsement for his idea (to the point of trying to sell the line that it wasn't their idea at all, just his) makes it his baby, and their lack of any other clear idea or alternative makes it the only proposal in town, as well. Granted, that could be a communication issue, in which case the blame would have to go onto the Chair or the Vice-Chair. Not sure either of those facts help him that much either, though :v

As for "support" vs. "responsible", consider that he changed the overall "sway" of opinion on STV from "bad idea" (CSM 6) to "STV itself is ok, Trebor's changes are not ok". That's what Frying Doom was saying (one of the few times he's actually made a good, coherent point. Funny how you latched onto that one but left the rest of the softball crazy talk alone) - in an attempt to remove bloc influence (his heavily-altered STV proposal), he's "handed it to the blocs" by going too far with his own alterations and normalizing regular STV in the process.

Friggz wrote:
I just don't really see what part of this is difficult to understand. I'm not even using big words here. Well, maybe disingenuous.


You want something to understand? Try this. Notice that Trebor himself hasn't been touching ANY of these points? Ask yourself if there's a reason for that, and then shortly after the reason dawns on you, thank whatever deity you like that it's a small field and Trebor's experience will give him a seat no matter what, else your posts might be backfiring even harder than Trebor's own voting proposal did.

"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
#618 - 2013-04-15 09:51:51 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
If he supported STV, why didn't he just propose it in the first place?

Because at the time, there was no indication that resources would be available to change the actual ballot process; it was entirely likely that it would remain as it was in the past -- "vote for one candidate"

Thus, the point of that thread was to promote discussion on a possible alternative that was better than the old system but could live within its constraints. And given those constraints, anyone who actually does some simulations will realize that transferrable overvotes gives a tasty edge to organized groups; thus the modification.

As it happened, the impassioned support for the sanctity of overvotes apparently helped convince CCP that a full STV system was worth the investment, and we got a multiple-choice ballot.

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Frying Doom
#619 - 2013-04-15 10:30:02 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
As for "support" vs. "responsible", consider that he changed the overall "sway" of opinion on STV from "bad idea" (CSM 6) to "STV itself is ok, Trebor's changes are not ok". That's what Frying Doom was saying (one of the few times he's actually made a good, coherent point. Funny how you latched onto that one but left the rest of the softball crazy talk alone) - in an attempt to remove bloc influence (his heavily-altered STV proposal), he's "handed it to the blocs" by going too far with his own alterations and normalizing regular STV in the process.

Softball?

I shall have to try harder Lol

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#620 - 2013-04-15 10:44:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
If he supported STV, why didn't he just propose it in the first place?

Because at the time, there was no indication that resources would be available to change the actual ballot process; it was entirely likely that it would remain as it was in the past -- "vote for one candidate"

Thus, the point of that thread was to promote discussion on a possible alternative that was better than the old system but could live within its constraints. And given those constraints, anyone who actually does some simulations will realize that transferrable overvotes gives a tasty edge to organized groups; thus the modification.

As it happened, the impassioned support for the sanctity of overvotes apparently helped convince CCP that a full STV system was worth the investment, and we got a multiple-choice ballot.


CSM 6, Summit Minutes, December wrote:
The third change proposed was changing the election system from the current form to a single transferrable vote (STV) (i.e. any surplus or unused votes are transferred according to the voter's stated preferences should their highest preference not need or not make it in). The timeframe for this change would be the election in 2013 (thus, no changes would be made for the next CSM election).

In short, the CSM said that if STV would be implemented it would be heaven for the powerblocks and would basically allow them to dictate every single seat on the CSM.

CCP already wanted an STV system. CSM 6 refused to accept it.

You and other members of CSM 7, let it through, even though you were a member of CSM6 and knew why it was blocked.

Still who was in on the decision to let it through is unanswered.

On that I will leave you with the last comment we the players got before CSM took over

CCP Xhagen wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
Forgive me if this comes off confrontational, but shouldn't the first step have been trying to get a real idea of what people ACTUALLY think of the current voting system before even considering a discussion about changing it?

Or better yet, not even think about changing it until you've got your voting numbers where you want them to be (or at least to where you think it's as good as it's going to get). You don't decorate your house until you're finished building it.

But I CAN talk about decorating my house before it is built. And talking about changing the election system also brings out peoples' opinion about the current election system.


It should be noted that this is also about the time that CSM 7s transperancy and communication changed to inactivity on the forums and a lack of transparency besides the Summit minutes.

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