These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CSM results

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Frying Doom
#21 - 2013-04-27 22:55:49 UTC
On the bright side.

CSM 7 can't have done that much harm. Apparently at the close of their term they still did not actually do anything.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Category:CSM_Seventh_Candidacy

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
None ofthe Above
#22 - 2013-04-27 23:03:53 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
None ofthe Above wrote:
I doubt that conclusion. It'll be interesting to run an analysis of FPTP with everyone's first pick though. That would be the closest approximation to a comparison of FPTP and STV.


Actually a closer approximation might have been last year when, you know, major blocs backed 1 candidate each.



Well whatever, dude. I think it's pretty arguable considering all the changes that have occurred in the last year. Backing one candidate each in FPTP vs many under STV doesn't make that much of a difference due to the elimination of the spoiler effect.

At any rate, I am pretty comfortable with the results. Dire predictions of nullsec domination have not come true. CFC and HBC blocs have some excellent representation as they should, but so do many other parts of the playerbase. Yay WH guys! RvB! Casuals! Provi!

I suspect it will be an interesting debate when it comes to electing the chair.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Frying Doom
#23 - 2013-04-27 23:11:27 UTC
While the candidates are diverse in some respects the vast majority still come from Null and Wormholes.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
None ofthe Above
#24 - 2013-04-27 23:29:31 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
While the candidates are diverse in some respects the vast majority still come from Null and Wormholes.


And this is unexpected? Its no worse than before. Might even be a bit better depending on how you look at it.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Frying Doom
#25 - 2013-04-27 23:32:07 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
While the candidates are diverse in some respects the vast majority still come from Null and Wormholes.


And this is unexpected? Its no worse than before. Might even be a bit better depending on how you look at it.

Yes the bright side is there are 2 WH members Smile

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
None ofthe Above
#26 - 2013-04-27 23:48:01 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
None ofthe Above wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
While the candidates are diverse in some respects the vast majority still come from Null and Wormholes.


And this is unexpected? Its no worse than before. Might even be a bit better depending on how you look at it.

Yes the bright side is there are 2 WH members Smile


And Milke.

And Ali

And ...

Wait lets go get the whole slate shall we?

Ali Aras
Chitsa Jason
James Arget
Kesper North
Korvin
Malcanis
Mangala Solaris
Mike Azariah
Mynnna
Ripard Teg
ProGodLegend
Sala Cameron
Sort Dragon
Trebor Daehdoow

Near as I can tell we got a group of hardworking individuals with diverse backgrounds. Korvin is likely a big step up in output over Green Lee. Ali is a promising world-wise newbie and Provi FC. Trebor, well our opinions of him are well documented. Malcanis has written some of the best essays on how to improve mechanics. Ripard the robo blogger. Mike the damn unicorn. Mangala Solaris of RvB (highsec? how'd that happen?) . And even the nullsec candidates have largely distinguished themselves very well and will be an asset to CSM and CCP.

This may very well be the hardest working CSM yet. We at least have a shot at something successful with this crew. Hopefully we won't have half to two thirds melt away right after the first meeting.

Honestly from this field of candidates, it's hard to say how this could have worked out much better (Psychotic Monk would have been nice, if for nothing else than giving me a perfect 5 out of 5 on my endorsements to elected ratio).

I am pretty happy with the results.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Callduron
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#27 - 2013-04-27 23:50:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Callduron
Snow Axe wrote:

*loses 10,000 votes even with CCP actually trying to promote the election for once*



Last year it was possible for anyone who plexes an account to generate an additional account simply by sending a buddy key to yourself and plexing it. We got 21 day buddy key +30 days on the alt and 30 days on the main. I made several such disposable alts for various reasons. It was a perfectly legal form of gameplay and no doubt a great many 51 day alts got created last election.

So last year anyone who wished to could generate +1 account for 7 weeks for each account paid for by plex completely free. And vote with it.

This is probably where your 10k additional votes came from.

So this year the same amount of real voters voted as last year and the year before. 49k, about 10% of all accounts.

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Shadow Cartel
#28 - 2013-04-28 00:25:19 UTC
Callduron wrote:
49k, about 10% of all accounts.

nasty trick that PLEX thing heheh.

On this math though, the Chinese weren't voting. I'm pretty sure the 500k "world wide subscribers" is generally accepted to include EVE China. Since relaunching it CCP's been pretty cagey about the actual real EVE Tranquility subscribers, but given the previous number of 300,000 and the moderate growth due to Retribution i'd guess that number to be somewhere between 315,000-325,000.

Since the player base is larger than CSM6 but the vote count was effectively the same, the % of voting players would by definition be down. But i think it'd only be down 1-3% not +6%

Alek the Kidnapper, Hero of the CSM
Frying Doom
#29 - 2013-04-28 00:43:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
Callduron wrote:
49k, about 10% of all accounts.

nasty trick that PLEX thing heheh.

On this math though, the Chinese weren't voting. I'm pretty sure the 500k "world wide subscribers" is generally accepted to include EVE China. Since relaunching it CCP's been pretty cagey about the actual real EVE Tranquility subscribers, but given the previous number of 300,000 and the moderate growth due to Retribution i'd guess that number to be somewhere between 315,000-325,000.

Since the player base is larger than CSM6 but the vote count was effectively the same, the % of voting players would by definition be down. But i think it'd only be down 1-3% not +6%

CCP reported 352,500 in March 2012, since then numbers have grown, but even if we take the figure from a year ago and use that to calculate we have only 14% of the population.

So down 2 and a half percent if we take it that the eve population has not grown in the last year but we all know it has.

So personally I would say a drop of 4-5%

but even at 14 percent flat is the worse election we have had in years.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2013-04-28 02:11:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
Callduron wrote:
This is probably where your 10k additional votes came from..


Sure doesn't explain the far smaller pool of candidates that ran this year. Unless of course you don't think far fewer candidates running plus a sizable drop in voting turnout means that the perception is that CSM 7 was a net negative for players. If that's the case, post with your CSM 7 main I guess?

Also I'm p. sure the PLEX account thing still required a minimum age before voting - one of my alt accounts couldn't vote last year for that reason. Don't remember if it was 30 or 60 days, though.

Frying Doom wrote:
but even at 14 percent flat is the worse election we have had in years.


It's the ONLY "bad" election we've had in years. Every CSM after CSM 4 has seen a notable rise in voting turnout until this one, and statistically the drops from CSM 1-2 and from 3-4 were far bigger than this one.

It's certainly not GOOD - they've basically lost what CSM 6 gained with the players - but to paint it as some catastrophe reminiscent of the early CSM's is nonsensical, even for you. Credit where credit is due - they seem to have made some good inroads with CCP, they just did it while forgetting the whole "representing the players" part of the deal. Hopefully CSM 8 can take the positives and fix the negatives.

"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["
Frying Doom
#31 - 2013-04-28 03:14:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Snow Axe wrote:

It's certainly not GOOD - they've basically lost what CSM 6 gained with the players - but to paint it as some catastrophe reminiscent of the early CSM's is nonsensical, even for you. Credit where credit is due - they seem to have made some good inroads with CCP, they just did it while forgetting the whole "representing the players" part of the deal. Hopefully CSM 8 can take the positives and fix the negatives.

Yes they did make some great leaps forward in being involved as a stakeholder. It is just the price that concerns me, the CSM went from being the voice of the players to just another arm of CCPs PR department, including cheerleading.

The fact that CCP did its largest ever campaign to get people to vote and the end result was a drop of 10,000 votes is a disaster. People did not want an STV system, and frankly people were turned off after CSM7s lack of transparency and communication.

The larger the backing the CSM has from the players the more it can act as our voice.

Edit: Apparently the turn out was 12.12% or there abouts, not my maths.

So that is a bloody disaster, down from 16.63% last year (With little advertising from CCP). CSM6 had a 14.25% turnout, CSM5 12.67%, before that the CSM terms were only 6 months long and the voter turn out really showed it CSM4 7.36%, CSM3 9,74%, CSM2 8,61%, CSM1 11,08%.

So the lowest turn out we have had since CSM changed to year long terms and you dont call that a disaster?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Apricot Baby
caldariprimeponyclub
#32 - 2013-04-28 05:54:19 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
So much for the unstoppable bloc vote.!


The one thing in life you can count on is not being able to count on Test :v

Still way more bloc candidates than FPTP and no Chair vote would have given, though.


I doubt that conclusion. It'll be interesting to run an analysis of FPTP with everyone's first pick though. That would be the closest approximation to a comparison of FPTP and STV.

EDIT: First post of this referred to "everyone's first prick". LOL. Terribly Freudian slip of me.


That is a fabulous idea, but I doubt CCP will play along sadly :(

Unreleased Ships (Images) - www.imgur.com/a/uablN Unreleased Ships (Videos) - www.youtube.com/user/TanithAmberdemon Eve Celshader Project - www.imgur.com/a/5mn44
June Ting
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#33 - 2013-04-28 06:07:05 UTC
Apricot Baby wrote:
None ofthe Above wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
So much for the unstoppable bloc vote.!


The one thing in life you can count on is not being able to count on Test :v

Still way more bloc candidates than FPTP and no Chair vote would have given, though.


I doubt that conclusion. It'll be interesting to run an analysis of FPTP with everyone's first pick though. That would be the closest approximation to a comparison of FPTP and STV.

EDIT: First post of this referred to "everyone's first prick". LOL. Terribly Freudian slip of me.


That is a fabulous idea, but I doubt CCP will play along sadly :(

Raw ballots are being released on Monday, including precise vote orderings on anonymous ballots, etc.. I know I certainly intend to do some analysis come Monday, and I'd bet Alikchi will have something 10x as well-researched up on themittani.com after ballot release as well.

I fight for the freedom of my people.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#34 - 2013-04-28 06:57:50 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Hopefully CSM 8 can take the positives and fix the negatives.


This is, essentially, the plan.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Prince Kobol
#35 - 2013-04-28 07:01:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Prince Kobol
My own opinion is that the lack of communication from the CSM has caused the most harm.

Most people I play with couldn't even tell you who the chairman of the CSM7 is or was

In fact when you check his blog the last update was September 2012...

Now of course if he had some real life event that has happened which has meant he no longer had the time then of course that is fine, Eve is just a game regardless of how much we love it, however a short blog saying that he can no longer do his duties as chairman and then pass over the chair would of been the responsible and right thing to do.

I mean I'm pretty sure it could of been done in say what.. 2 - 3 mins?

Out of the 13 CSM 7 members we usually see posts from maybe 4 of them on a regular basis. The rest appear to do well... nothing.

I am sure if Two Step was given the Chair then we would of saw more interactive CSM, which in turn maybe wouldn't of caused so a low turn out.
5par7icus
Spartan II Industries
#36 - 2013-04-28 09:28:46 UTC  |  Edited by: 5par7icus
EDIT: question already asked Lol

WTF CCP why did you have to go and do (insert latest c*ck up here) bad form!!
None ofthe Above
#37 - 2013-04-28 12:43:44 UTC  |  Edited by: None ofthe Above
Prince Kobol wrote:
My own opinion is that the lack of communication from the CSM has caused the most harm.

Most people I play with couldn't even tell you who the chairman of the CSM7 is or was

In fact when you check his blog the last update was September 2012...

Now of course if he had some real life event that has happened which has meant he no longer had the time then of course that is fine, Eve is just a game regardless of how much we love it, however a short blog saying that he can no longer do his duties as chairman and then pass over the chair would of been the responsible and right thing to do.

I mean I'm pretty sure it could of been done in say what.. 2 - 3 mins?

Out of the 13 CSM 7 members we usually see posts from maybe 4 of them on a regular basis. The rest appear to do well... nothing.

I am sure if Two Step was given the Chair then we would of saw more interactive CSM, which in turn maybe wouldn't of caused so a low turn out.


I do think you actually have a good point here, although not sure I agree on "most harm". CSM was fairly interactive in the last couple of months and much of the playerbase remains stubbornly ignorant about such things.

But yes, I think the CSM did itself a disservice this year by being not as communicative, not as interactive as you say.

There was a point at which the CSM basically shutdown. Perhaps it was due to not being able to say much due to NDA. But if there is not much they could be saying, there was certainly a lot they could have been asking the playerbase. It did not seem to occur to them. A good chair who has more time to do the job than Selene did and the will to get out there to talk to people would help.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
None ofthe Above
#38 - 2013-04-28 12:48:26 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:

It's certainly not GOOD - they've basically lost what CSM 6 gained with the players - but to paint it as some catastrophe reminiscent of the early CSM's is nonsensical, even for you. Credit where credit is due - they seem to have made some good inroads with CCP, they just did it while forgetting the whole "representing the players" part of the deal. Hopefully CSM 8 can take the positives and fix the negatives.

Yes they did make some great leaps forward in being involved as a stakeholder. It is just the price that concerns me, the CSM went from being the voice of the players to just another arm of CCPs PR department, including cheerleading.

The fact that CCP did its largest ever campaign to get people to vote and the end result was a drop of 10,000 votes is a disaster. People did not want an STV system, and frankly people were turned off after CSM7s lack of transparency and communication.

The larger the backing the CSM has from the players the more it can act as our voice.

Edit: Apparently the turn out was 12.12% or there abouts, not my maths.

So that is a bloody disaster, down from 16.63% last year (With little advertising from CCP). CSM6 had a 14.25% turnout, CSM5 12.67%, before that the CSM terms were only 6 months long and the voter turn out really showed it CSM4 7.36%, CSM3 9,74%, CSM2 8,61%, CSM1 11,08%.

So the lowest turn out we have had since CSM changed to year long terms and you dont call that a disaster?


I agree with you that this particular aspect of this election is a tragedy. It should be highlighted as something that MUST be improved upon.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Prince Kobol
#39 - 2013-04-28 13:24:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Prince Kobol
The question is how do the CSM and CCP tackle the issue of improving the visibility of the CSM with the player base and then stressing how important the CSM is to the ongoing development of Eve.

I think the only real way that the second part can be done is by a constant stream of interactive communication between the player base and CSM.

By Interactive, I mean actual Q&A session with the CSM say every 3 months where the players can ask questions, share their thoughts on what is important to them. You could hold a number of different Q&A sessions, each dealing with different aspect of Eve, Industry, Faction Warfare, Null, WH etc which the CSM can decided amongst themselves who would be best to sit on each Q&A.

A few forums posts is not good enough as they just tend to dissolve into trolling, name calling and get lost in the plethora of other forums posts.
Callduron
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#40 - 2013-04-28 21:58:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Callduron
Snow Axe wrote:
]This is probably where your 10k additional votes came from..


Sure doesn't explain the far smaller pool of candidates that ran this year. [/quote]

The candidate pool was both small and quite poor this year. I read through all of the CSM pitches here and some of them were amazingly lazy. One guy's entire platform was "vote for me so I can whine about my titan."

If your line is last year lots of people voted because CSM 6 was amazing and this year the numbers were down because CSM 7 was terrible (numbers of both candidates and voters) I think you may be drawing the wrong conclusion. CSM7 had a hand in Retribution (one of the best expansions for years) and Odyssey (which looks amazing). It's wrong to call them a failure based on results.

CSM 6 was involved in a highly visible "rescue" of Eve after Incarna monoclegate and the Jita riots. Although that was bad for Eve it was very good for the CSM with the perception being that CCP was out of touch, the CSM was needed to fix this.

I suspect more people turned out to vote after the CSM had been portrayed as the 7th Cavalry rescuing the game than after a quietly efficient year. I don't think the amount of players who get involved in the player council is a measure of the health of the game but of its drama.

Quote:
If that's the case, post with your CSM 7 main I guess?


This is my main.

Quote:
Also I'm p. sure the PLEX account thing still required a minimum age before voting - one of my alt accounts couldn't vote last year for that reason. Don't remember if it was 30 or 60 days, though.


If 30 days it would just have been a matter of being organised. Also if you were a trial your alt wouldn't have been able to vote. If 60 days I'm wrong, I didn't try to vote last year on a 51 day alt. But in any event it's fixed now.

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.