These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: CSM 9 Results!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#161 - 2014-05-09 22:29:14 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
I suggested that people take a % hit to their skill training time if they DIDN'T vote since psych studies show that you are more likely to respond to loss than bribes.



Because how could this ever result in people just logging in to vote, immediately selecting the first few options, and voting to avoid any skill training loss, resulting in completely skewed representation in elections? Forcing people to vote will not only completely trivialize the CSM having it turn into just a lottery crapshoot, but will build animosity toward players being punished for not engaging in something that they don't want to engage in. Yes, people are more likely to respond to loss, than bribes. No, the sort of response that you get from it is not a positive one.
Darin Vanar
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#162 - 2014-05-09 22:32:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Darin Vanar
I'm glad none of the candidates I chose even remotely came even close to winning a seat. This will make it easier for me to decide how to vote in the next election.
I expect you will have an even lower turn out of votes next year.

Just like in real life, let the blocs fight it out.

Even an EVE election has proved how much the individual vote is worth. Without lobbying, your vote means nothing.

In the interest of fairness, CCP should just select from the candidates themselves, and just cycle various interests over the years. These elections are a sham.

Dinsdale for CSM!
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#163 - 2014-05-09 22:32:49 UTC
Dirk MacGirk wrote:

agreed, but that is the same mentality for voter antipathy in the real world. Bah, it all doesn't matter, that group over there controls it all anyway. If we can't cure it in the real world, what makes us think we can solve it here?

We have a great deal more flexibility in eve as opposed to RL, as well as fewer significant consequences.

We can cure it by fixing the issue. The "abstain" or "you should all go away" option is one way of fixing it. Another alternative would be to include a downvote option of sorts. In the current STV system, you have 14 votes. You could easily modify it to include a "downvote" such that you could either choose to support or reject a particular candidate with your first vote, and likewise for all subsequent votes.

Hisec miners, for example, might not have any unified idea on whom to vote for, but they might have one or two unified ideas on whom to vote against.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#164 - 2014-05-09 22:34:14 UTC
Darin Vanar wrote:
Dinsdale for CSM!

i would vote for dinsdale for csm as long as someone promised me video of the summits

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Dave Stark
#165 - 2014-05-09 22:38:22 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Darin Vanar wrote:
Dinsdale for CSM!

i would vote for dinsdale for csm as long as someone promised me video of the summits

how long are you willing to wait? if we have to wait months for *words* i imagine it'd take even longer to sort out a full video.
Darin Vanar
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#166 - 2014-05-09 22:39:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Darin Vanar
I would even settle for PDFs.


*drools*

I hope you don't take this in any way creepy, Dins. Can we call you Dins?
Gin Alley
#167 - 2014-05-09 22:40:29 UTC
Tarikla wrote:
And to comment on the low amount of Votes :

- 1 Announcment in Launcher, for most of the time second/thrid slide, so not really effective
- 1 News at mid-election to inform that Elections were opened, quickly overshadowed by some DevBlogs
- No "In game Login Screen Announcment" like there was every single year before
- No Candidates who actually reached out in Game to High Sec. I remember having at least 1 or 2 CSM candidates sending Eve-Mails to as much people as they could, this year around no one did it.

I would also say that each year players who are involved feels that the CSM is less and less meaningful and more and more of a "advisor" than anything else, which dosen't help getting people to actually read and vote :)


They have done all these things in the past like popups and evemails and the populace whined and moaned about being spammed ingame and having to click away popups on the screens of their 97 isboxed ice miners, etc.
corebloodbrothers
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#168 - 2014-05-09 22:45:34 UTC
alot of debate about my "lost" votes. First people spend alot of time mentioning i would not get elected. (thnx for that btw, best publicity ever, united provi even more), mentioning i would get 1200, fall short and so on.

Then we do pull it off, and provi is proud of it , and poeple complain about my wasted votes. Its clear voting strategically was not on our mind at all. thats not a bad thing from some points of view. I never asked anyone even to vote mandatory, i mentioned a few names i trust on comms several times but thats it. Apparently other candidates didnt tickle my voters boxes to put them on a spot. Candidates who didnt make it in could think, damm if i did reach those players, wow i woudl have been in, instead of looking at the guy that did get in. ( Provi also didnt have a internal second candidate)

I am extremly proud of the people that helped me get the resuts we had, the voters, in and outside providence you voted with your heart and weirdly enough for me, feels a bit humbling, again thank you.

real work just started, thnx all so far,

greetz core


#obvioustroll for csm 10, convoy me with price for ballot spot i have 800 votes u can buy Big smileBig smileBig smileBig smile
Kethry Avenger
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#169 - 2014-05-09 22:58:47 UTC
So with the assumption that the same percentage of subscribed accounts voted as last year. Tranquility only has 257,997 subscribers vs 409,759 last year.

Though considering the abysmal promoting that happened for the election, and that no new means of voter education were promoted by CCP this year, that is probably a wrong assumption. But I'm sure subscriptions are down otherwise they would have given us the numbers to figure it out.

CCP could of course clear this up by telling us what percentage of the subscribers voted.

If the percentage is the same then EVE is dying but the same percentage is engaged with the CSM.

If the percentage is lower EVE is not growing but just people aren't bothering with the CSM.

If the percentage is higher, the server is being shut down the day Valkyrie goes live.


Congratulations to the winners.

If you didn't vote, feel free to say why you didn't so CCP can make changes, but don't bother bitchen to the CSM if they do stuff you don't like. I find it funny that people have time to post multiple times about why they didn't or won't vote but can't find time to find 1-14 candidates they want to vote for.
Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#170 - 2014-05-09 23:04:04 UTC
I would love an abstain button.

Where is the reason for hisec to vote for nullsec candidates?
It mostly seems that there is little to no give on Dev ideas and CSM members in the nullsec groups just get NDA materials they can work off of six months before anyone else solidifying their position well before its public.
With the perception of that sort of Nullsec/Dev relationship, Why would it matter for the small hisec industrialist to vote for? its all the same anyways. Blue Donut is blue donut
A similar hisec candidate isnt going to have much power in the null dominated CSM, nor are they going to share the same way that the nullsec members are assumed to.

Where are the polls for next expansion directions?
No real voting system for actual improvements.

We can vote for a CSM but one of the many reasons so many of us live in hisec is because we cannot maintain a Nullsec (or more accurately, what is perceived as a) schedule.
We could vote all hisec candidates if there was any organization, but if we, as individuals, could really put that kind of campaigning time into it, we would most likely be nullsec leaders or candidates.
Hisec voices generally get ignored in the greater clamor of semi mindless nullsec block votes. And even with the DEv blog feedback that too seems to get lost in general clamor of badposting goons.

What gets recited to us the most , on the forums and in the game is "Vote with your wallet" which when you think about it is a really terrible statement for someone who wants to improve the game. If the only way you can help change a game is to quit, well whats the point?

As someone in game with more cap bpo's then corpmates, "go along or quit" because i cant organize to beat the 1200 goon votes for the nullsec candidates it is a really pretty lackluster election.

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
Dave Stark
#171 - 2014-05-09 23:09:19 UTC
Kusum Fawn wrote:
Where is the reason for hisec to vote for nullsec candidates?


you seem to think that the csm is a tool for pushing personal agendas. it's not.
Greater Roadrunner
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#172 - 2014-05-09 23:15:28 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Kusum Fawn wrote:
Where is the reason for hisec to vote for nullsec candidates?


you seem to think that the csm is a tool for pushing personal agendas. it's not.


If there is no reason to vote then there should be no vote.
Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate
#173 - 2014-05-09 23:16:24 UTC
Kusum Fawn wrote:
I would love an abstain button.

Where is the reason for hisec to vote for nullsec candidates?
It mostly seems that there is little to no give on Dev ideas and CSM members in the nullsec groups just get NDA materials they can work off of six months before anyone else solidifying their position well before its public.
With the perception of that sort of Nullsec/Dev relationship, Why would it matter for the small hisec industrialist to vote for? its all the same anyways. Blue Donut is blue donut
A similar hisec candidate isnt going to have much power in the null dominated CSM, nor are they going to share the same way that the nullsec members are assumed to.

Where are the polls for next expansion directions?
No real voting system for actual improvements.

We can vote for a CSM but one of the many reasons so many of us live in hisec is because we cannot maintain a Nullsec (or more accurately, what is perceived as a) schedule.
We could vote all hisec candidates if there was any organization, but if we, as individuals, could really put that kind of campaigning time into it, we would most likely be nullsec leaders or candidates.
Hisec voices generally get ignored in the greater clamor of semi mindless nullsec block votes. And even with the DEv blog feedback that too seems to get lost in general clamor of badposting goons.

What gets recited to us the most , on the forums and in the game is "Vote with your wallet" which when you think about it is a really terrible statement for someone who wants to improve the game. If the only way you can help change a game is to quit, well whats the point?

As someone in game with more cap bpo's then corpmates, "go along or quit" because i cant organize to beat the 1200 goon votes for the nullsec candidates it is a really pretty lackluster election.


Come on man, you have to put more effort into the tinfoil stuff than to just keep referencing "goons" and "nullsec" and "blue donut". I mean, you did try and lob in the fact that they use the position for personal benefit 6 months before everyone else, so you get +2 Tinfoil Credits for that.

Evidence or it's just sperge. Which is of course your right as a voter, whether you cast your vote or not. Not all nullsec dwellers are the same. Not all hisec dwellers are the same. Not all CSM members, regardless of where they reside in game are beholden to some code of "protect our space income through the CSM." CCP isn't populated by a bunch of popsicles that just fell off the Icelandik short bus. By this time in the game they can tell when CSM members or the CSM as a whole is trying to lobby for changes that will only benefit one area for some kind of personal agenda.

Again, if you want to tinfoil your life away and act like some rural nut who thinks every guy in a suit is from the government and coming to take your land, well, have at it. Just know that will not make your case anymore legitimate.
Dave Stark
#174 - 2014-05-09 23:23:48 UTC
Greater Roadrunner wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Kusum Fawn wrote:
Where is the reason for hisec to vote for nullsec candidates?


you seem to think that the csm is a tool for pushing personal agendas. it's not.


If there is no reason to vote then there should be no vote.


there is a reason to vote, that reason isn't to push personal agendas though.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#175 - 2014-05-09 23:25:05 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Darin Vanar wrote:
Dinsdale for CSM!

i would vote for dinsdale for csm as long as someone promised me video of the summits


Another reason I will never run.
Any video of the summits would have a good chance of being used in court proceedings.
Greater Roadrunner
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#176 - 2014-05-09 23:25:58 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Greater Roadrunner wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Kusum Fawn wrote:
Where is the reason for hisec to vote for nullsec candidates?


you seem to think that the csm is a tool for pushing personal agendas. it's not.


If there is no reason to vote then there should be no vote.


there is a reason to vote, that reason isn't to push personal agendas though.


Care to name it? In fact, that would be the answer to an original question.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#177 - 2014-05-09 23:27:11 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Greater Roadrunner wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Kusum Fawn wrote:
Where is the reason for hisec to vote for nullsec candidates?


you seem to think that the csm is a tool for pushing personal agendas. it's not.


If there is no reason to vote then there should be no vote.


there is a reason to vote, that reason isn't to push personal agendas though.


Of course it is used to push personal agendas, or at least, group advantages.
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#178 - 2014-05-09 23:28:53 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
Darin Vanar wrote:
Dinsdale for CSM!

i would vote for dinsdale for csm as long as someone promised me video of the summits


Another reason I will never run.
Any video of the summits would have a good chance of being used in court proceedings.

ahahahaha

what real life crime is being committed in your fantasy world
Dave Stark
#179 - 2014-05-09 23:31:13 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Greater Roadrunner wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Kusum Fawn wrote:
Where is the reason for hisec to vote for nullsec candidates?


you seem to think that the csm is a tool for pushing personal agendas. it's not.


If there is no reason to vote then there should be no vote.


there is a reason to vote, that reason isn't to push personal agendas though.


Of course it is used to push personal agendas, or at least, group advantages.


and people really want people like this voting?
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#180 - 2014-05-09 23:41:26 UTC
GreasyCarl Semah wrote:
Apparently this is rocket science level V.

If you actually read the thread carefully from the beginning and sound the big words out you will see that a big concern is that a lot of players aren't aware that the CSM process even exists. Wouldn't giving away free stuff alleviate most of that concern? Perhaps we can compare the number of people who voted in the election to the number of people who got their free Gecko drones?
Yes, I get that genius. Do you not understand that Voting for a prize != Engagement? Voting for a prize would get more votes, certainly, but it would undermine the fundamental reason for the CSM, since voting at random just for a prize would be far far worse than not voting.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.