These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

CSM voting is not a democratical process

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cheng Musana
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2014-04-10 02:46:18 UTC
I might not playing this game like some other people but are im not the only one who thinks that people with multiple accounts should not get multiple chances to vote? For example some one with 3 accounts can vote 3 times though its just in fact 1 choice from a single person behind it. Only because people are willing to pay more should not allow them to outweight the opinions from others. In the real world i aswell have only 1 vote regardless if im rich, middle class or poor. Everybody gets only 1 voice which they can use.

I know that some people are taking this "imersion thing" more serious and probs claim that each of their accounts has a individual personality. But in reality its just 1 guy stuffing burritos in his mouth watching over 6 monitors.
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#2 - 2014-04-10 02:46:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Doc Fury
You must be new here.. Welcome to EVE...

also:
--> Jita Park Speakers Corner

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#3 - 2014-04-10 02:51:24 UTC
It's a libertarian democracy.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
DRGaius Baltar
Perkone
Caldari State
#4 - 2014-04-10 02:52:41 UTC
Cheng Musana wrote:
I might not playing this game like some other people but are im not the only one who thinks that people with multiple accounts should not get multiple chances to vote? For example some one with 3 accounts can vote 3 times though its just in fact 1 choice from a single person behind it. Only because people are willing to pay more should not allow them to outweight the opinions from others. In the real world i aswell have only 1 vote regardless if im rich, middle class or poor. Everybody gets only 1 voice which they can use.

I know that some people are taking this "imersion thing" more serious and probs claim that each of their accounts has a individual personality. But in reality its just 1 guy stuffing burritos in his mouth watching over 6 monitors.


Either is renting
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#5 - 2014-04-10 02:54:29 UTC
Dear -A-: One of your space slaves thinks he has a voice. Please deal with this accordingly.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
stoicfaux
#6 - 2014-04-10 03:14:53 UTC
Cheng Musana wrote:
I might not playing this game like some other people but are im not the only one who thinks that people with multiple accounts should not get multiple chances to vote? For example some one with 3 accounts can vote 3 times though its just in fact 1 choice from a single person behind it. Only because people are willing to pay more should not allow them to outweight the opinions from others. In the real world i aswell have only 1 vote regardless if im rich, middle class or poor. Everybody gets only 1 voice which they can use.

I know that some people are taking this "imersion thing" more serious and probs claim that each of their accounts has a individual personality. But in reality its just 1 guy stuffing burritos in his mouth watching over 6 monitors.

You obviously don't understand voting. You have one vote to elect a representative. Then you can get more votes by making donations to your representative to get your representative to vote on the legislation that you would or would not like to see passed.

See? One person having many votes is the norm in a democracy.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#7 - 2014-04-10 03:20:21 UTC
hi i'm also uncomfortable with this, i'd prefer it if one player had one vote. but from what i remember ccp has problems identifiying players from accounts without a human investigation, so i think one player/one vote'd be difficult to enforce and subject to shenanigans

i'd prefer one account/one vote for now because it's a transparent system that's not open to mucking about
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#8 - 2014-04-10 03:26:11 UTC
Still more Democratic than the USA, or China, or Crimea.
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#9 - 2014-04-10 03:26:37 UTC
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
Still more Democratic than the USA, or China, or Crimea.


This thread is going places.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2014-04-10 03:27:11 UTC
First off, I would imagine it would be near impossible to be able to accurately link the thousands of eve accounts to their RL owners.

Second, Say I have 10 accounts and you have 1. I am generating 10x the revenue for CCP than you. Why shouldin't I get 10x the voting power?
Rowells
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#11 - 2014-04-10 03:29:47 UTC
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
Still more Democratic than the USA, or China, or Crimea.

I hear Afghanistan had a pretty decent election this year
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#12 - 2014-04-10 03:30:30 UTC
Derath Ellecon wrote:
First off, I would imagine it would be near impossible to be able to accurately link the thousands of eve accounts to their RL owners.

Second, Say I have 10 accounts and you have 1. I am generating 10x the revenue for CCP than you. Why shouldin't I get 10x the voting power?


There is precedent for this. It's similar to why the USA has The House of Representatives which is based off population.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
Rowells
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#13 - 2014-04-10 03:35:07 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
Derath Ellecon wrote:
First off, I would imagine it would be near impossible to be able to accurately link the thousands of eve accounts to their RL owners.

Second, Say I have 10 accounts and you have 1. I am generating 10x the revenue for CCP than you. Why shouldin't I get 10x the voting power?


There is precedent for this. It's similar to why the USA has The House of Representatives which is based off population.

of course you got the amarr always trying to pull the 3/5 compromise with the rest of the empires
Endovior
PFU Consortium
#14 - 2014-04-10 03:37:35 UTC
Cheng Musana wrote:
For example some one with 3 accounts can vote 3 times though its just in fact 1 choice from a single person behind it.


Yes, and?

The CSM aren't a political authority, they're an advisory panel. They are intended to give CCP advice that reflects the opinions of their subscriber base. Accordingly BobTheMiner, with his twelve mining characters, constitutes twelve times as much customer as you do. Given that the CSM voting system now explicitly takes your session cookie and copies your voting list when you login between accounts, it's clear that CCP are explicitly supporting the many accounts, many votes model.

It's their advisory panel, and they care about Bob's opinions twelve times more than they do yours, because Bob gives them twelve times as much money. That's why Bob gets twelve votes, and you get one.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#15 - 2014-04-10 03:45:03 UTC
The characters on my accounts each have their own personality. They might vote differently to each other.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#16 - 2014-04-10 03:48:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Derath Ellecon wrote:
Second, Say I have 10 accounts and you have 1. I am generating 10x the revenue for CCP than you. Why shouldin't I get 10x the voting power?


You know that ALOD and follow up scam a few weeks ago with the article on TMC?

This one: Go Back to WoW

It's a good demonstration that the number of accounts =/= revenue.

The capacity to provide revenue to CCP is derived from the player's situation, not directly from the number of accounts that player owns.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#17 - 2014-04-10 03:51:46 UTC
Endovior wrote:

Given that the CSM voting system now explicitly takes your session cookie and copies your voting list when you login between accounts, it's clear that CCP are explicitly supporting the many accounts, many votes model.


And thank goodness for that. Much as my voting was probably very odd for a lot of High Sec players, since I don't have the time currently to play in low, null or WH space, in that I included mainly non high sec candidates.
It was a relief to not have to manually enter the list.
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2014-04-10 03:58:16 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Derath Ellecon wrote:
Second, Say I have 10 accounts and you have 1. I am generating 10x the revenue for CCP than you. Why shouldin't I get 10x the voting power?


You know that ALOD and follow up scam a few weeks ago with the article on TMC?

This one: Go Back to WoW

It's a good demonstration that the number of accounts =/= revenue.

The capacity to provide revenue to CCP is derived from the player, not from the number of accounts that player owns.



Only partially correct. Really. Of course you know that if you understand how PLEX works.

Doesn't change the fact that a player with 10 accounts at least generates 10x the revenue "demand" (maybe a more accurate portrayal) than the player with 1 account.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#19 - 2014-04-10 04:01:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Derath Ellecon wrote:
Doesn't change the fact that a player with 10 accounts at least generates 10x the revenue "demand" (maybe a more accurate portrayal) than the player with 1 account.


BS, though "partially correct" is still much better than totally wrong. It generates 10x the subscription revenue, given that both players being compared pay for their subscription the same way. That's it. Nothing further.

Outside that, it has no bearing on total revenue, which is not dependent on the number of accounts a player owns.

This is starting to go off topic into revenue as opposed to the "non-democratic" process around the CSM voting, so perhaps a different thread is the way to go rather than we take it totally off topic. Happy to keep discussing economics though.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#20 - 2014-04-10 04:07:42 UTC
Tell me I'm not the only who chuckled at "democratical".

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
123Next pageLast page