These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Boycott the CSM selection process and vote
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mnengli Noiliffe
Doomheim
#81 - 2012-01-27 07:56:20 UTC
Tallianna Avenkarde wrote:
Boycotting the vote just means you don't have a vote. CCP will not notice, nor care, due to the fact that only a small percentage of people vote anyway. Your opposition will be lost in a sea of apathy.

but then CCP won't be able to keep telling that CSM represents the majority of their customers. as it clearly only represents the small percentage of them instead.

what is the point in CSM, then? also, when the whole CSM is from the same marginal group of players, it creates impression that CCP does not really want the remaining majority, which is not good for business.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#82 - 2012-01-27 08:03:19 UTC
Ladie Harlot wrote:
We should get rid of the entire election. Let Mittens, chairman of the most successful CSM in history, choose the rest of the council and go from there.


I lol'd in RL!
Tiberius Sunstealer
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#83 - 2012-01-27 08:30:24 UTC
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Can we write in Ron Paul?

RON PAUL! RON PAUL! RON PAUL!
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#84 - 2012-01-27 09:20:44 UTC
met worst wrote:
If you truly think as I do that the CSM selection system is flawed, pointless and no more than a 0.0 boys club, don't stand, don't select and don't vote.

If CCP can see that the CSM is wasted effort for THE MAJORITY (as it always has been), emphasise the irrelevance by treating it like the festering sore it has become.

Force the issue to a fairer method of representation. Better to have no system than a bad system.

Show your disgust. DO NOTHING.




Idiot, and then 0.0 will have the whole CSM... oh whait

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude
Tallianna Avenkarde
Pyre of Gods
#85 - 2012-01-27 09:24:12 UTC
Mnengli Noiliffe wrote:
Tallianna Avenkarde wrote:
Boycotting the vote just means you don't have a vote. CCP will not notice, nor care, due to the fact that only a small percentage of people vote anyway. Your opposition will be lost in a sea of apathy.

but then CCP won't be able to keep telling that CSM represents the majority of their customers. as it clearly only represents the small percentage of them instead.

what is the point in CSM, then? also, when the whole CSM is from the same marginal group of players, it creates impression that CCP does not really want the remaining majority, which is not good for business.



But the CSM doesnt represent the majority of eve players now.
They represent the people that voted for them, and have done pretty well at that IMO.

If you want someone other then mittens in the CSM, then all you have to do is make sure as many people in your sphere of influence vote..

Hell how many people are in these incursion channels?? Get them all to vote!

Those that can't be bothered to vote, have no right to vote.

Me, I'm voting for Jester if he runs, and Lyris if he doesn't

v0v

And a sudden plunge in the sullen swell. Ten fathoms deep on the road to hell.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#86 - 2012-01-27 10:17:49 UTC
silent majority will never be heard....
good luck Cool

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Samillian
Angry Mustellid
#87 - 2012-01-27 10:29:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Samillian
met worst wrote:
If you truly think as I do that the CSM selection system is flawed, pointless and no more than a 0.0 boys club, don't stand, don't select and don't vote.

If CCP can see that the CSM is wasted effort for THE MAJORITY (as it always has been), emphasise the irrelevance by treating it like the festering sore it has become.

Force the issue to a fairer method of representation. Better to have no system than a bad system.

Show your disgust. DO NOTHING.





If the majority of players do as you ask how would you be able to tell the difference between the upcoming and and any other CSM election? You wouldn't know if you had support or if the end result was just the ongoing apathy and ignorance of the general EvE resident.

I suggest you look "redundant" and "pointless" up in a good dictionary and then go back to the drawing board.

NBSI shall be the whole of the Law
Aruken Marr
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#88 - 2012-01-27 10:36:34 UTC
met worst wrote:
Better to have no system than a bad system.


Actually, no. Democracy has taught us one thing and that is that it's a terrible system. But its the best system we have. Better to have democratic representation than no representation...
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#89 - 2012-01-27 10:37:32 UTC
Tallianna Avenkarde wrote:



But the CSM doesnt represent the majority of eve players now.
They represent the people that voted for them, and have done pretty well at that IMO.



The current CSM reprisents the majority of people who care enough about this game to vote.
Samantha Utama
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#90 - 2012-01-27 10:45:21 UTC
'Not voting' worked out really well last year. Let's get that apathy going a second time around! Cool
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#91 - 2012-01-27 10:45:23 UTC
Mnengli Noiliffe wrote:
Tallianna Avenkarde wrote:
Boycotting the vote just means you don't have a vote. CCP will not notice, nor care, due to the fact that only a small percentage of people vote anyway. Your opposition will be lost in a sea of apathy.

but then CCP won't be able to keep telling that CSM represents the majority of their customers. as it clearly only represents the small percentage of them instead.
They'd be able to keep saying that just fine, simply based on the notion that the CSM collects input from all a majority of the customers and present it to CCP.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#92 - 2012-01-27 10:47:17 UTC
met worst wrote:
If you truly think as I do that the CSM selection system is flawed, pointless and no more than a 0.0 boys club, don't stand, don't select and don't vote.

If CCP can see that the CSM is wasted effort for THE MAJORITY (as it always has been), emphasise the irrelevance by treating it like the festering sore it has become.

Force the issue to a fairer method of representation. Better to have no system than a bad system.

Show your disgust. DO NOTHING.



This is the probably the worst case of dumbfounded logic I've yet to see in these forums.


No, I take that back.

This sub forum channel clearly portrays the worst case of dumbfounded logic I've yet to see in these forums.

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
seany1212
M Y S T
#93 - 2012-01-27 10:48:41 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Tallianna Avenkarde wrote:



But the CSM doesnt represent the majority of eve players now.
They represent the people that voted for them, and have done pretty well at that IMO.



The current CSM reprisents the majority of people who care enough about this game to vote.


+1, OP needs to stop throwing his doll out of the pram and run himself
Jarnis McPieksu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#94 - 2012-01-27 11:05:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Jarnis McPieksu
Uh, previous CSM elections were "boycotted" by something like 80%+ of the players (very low voter turnout), so you would have to do miracles to make it so much worse it would look bad. The current situation is exactly due to what you advocate; not voting.

At the moment very few people vote in CSM elections. Those null blocks that get their guys on the CSM are "profiting" from this. They understand the benefits so they tell their pilots to go and vote. Shocker result: 0.0 alliance CSM candidates get voted in.

If you can someone get the vast majority of EVE players who do not vote to vote, and vote for a candidate you prefer, you suddenly win. The untapped vote is massive.

Get a good highsec carebear CSM candidate, run a good campaign, promote issues that are not stupid (your current "don't vote" doesn't qualify) and who knows... maybe some more people care to vote and poof, CSM has highsec carebear rep. Or two. Or three.
Valei Khurelem
#95 - 2012-01-27 11:09:38 UTC
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Can we write in Ron Paul?

IBTL


Ron Paul for CSM! :D

"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP."   - CCP Ytterbium
met worst
Doomheim
#96 - 2012-01-27 11:41:03 UTC
I've read every post carefully and there is one trend forming that completely misses the mark of my OP.

Most are extolling the virtue of the CSM voting system post-process. I am extolling the lack of virtue pre-process. An entirely different matter.

By voting in such a flawed system you are accepting the flawed system and are participating in it's "rightfullness" by default whether you agree with the system or not. You are abrogating your responsibility to declare the system faulty and seek change.

A vote in a flawed system is a flawed vote - doesn't matter how you try to intepret it, wordsmith it or turn a blind eye to it.

The majority of Eve has previously proved it's indifference to the CSM process (it's in the numbers) and any attempt to downplay this is showing absolute ignorance to the glaringly obvious flaw.

Be that as it may, I along with many, many thousands of Eve players will not participate in the CSM process. If this somehow emboldens those that do into believing that it's democracy at work, well then enjoy.

God help the country you reside in if you are that ******* gullible.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#97 - 2012-01-27 11:45:44 UTC
met worst wrote:
By voting in such a flawed system you are accepting the flawed system and are participating in it's "rightfullness" by default whether you agree with the system or not.
What's flawed about it?
met worst
Doomheim
#98 - 2012-01-27 11:49:03 UTC
Tippia wrote:
met worst wrote:
By voting in such a flawed system you are accepting the flawed system and are participating in it's "rightfullness" by default whether you agree with the system or not.
What's flawed about it?

Read the thread first and then use 50c to call someone who gives a **** about the BS you're about to espouse..
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#99 - 2012-01-27 11:54:08 UTC
KrakizBad wrote:
Hahaha, yes don't vote. That will work well for you.


It's a moot point really. Take the US political system. I see Ron Paul's name plastered all over the place. I see his name 3 times out of 5 of any name of any politician currently running. And yet he routinely doesn't perform well in the polls. One can look at that and say he either doesn't perform well in the polls or that something is fundamentally flawed in the system.

One can also look at the traditional 2 party system. Here in the US we have our choice, in the end, of either corporate candidate number 1 or corporate candidate number 2. Both candidates are funded by exactly the same people with minor variance. The only difference is who gets more funding from corporate America. Usually, funding is determined by who has a better chance of winning. In this case, does it matter if one votes?

Don't ban me, bro!
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#100 - 2012-01-27 11:54:12 UTC
met worst wrote:
Read the thread first and then use 50c to call someone who gives a **** about the BS you're about to espouse..
So there's nothing flawed about the system, then?

You just keep saying that it is, but you never explain how.