These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 Voting System - Two Votes per Account - For and Against

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2012-01-29 22:06:09 UTC
tl;dr - Every account gets two votes, a VOTE FOR applied to a candidate, and a VOTE AGAINST applied to a candidate.

Full post
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#2 - 2012-01-29 22:17:35 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
tl;dr - Every account gets two votes, a VOTE FOR applied to a candidate, and a VOTE AGAINST applied to a candidate.

Full post


How about just one vote per account, and leave it at that.
Zirse
Risktech Analytics
#3 - 2012-01-29 22:25:37 UTC
This would work to the advantage of the 'established voting blocs.'
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#4 - 2012-01-29 22:27:50 UTC
This doesn't change anything. The blocks still have massive voting power, and can now place negative votes to their opponents.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#5 - 2012-01-29 22:29:09 UTC
This sounds a little like an anti goon plot.
Botleten
Perkone
Caldari State
#6 - 2012-01-29 22:41:22 UTC
Im gonna laugh when Mittens gets re-elected. Maybe if you publish enough articles with horrifically stupid ideas oh how to keep Mittani from getting elected one of them will actually not get completely ignored and/or laughed at.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2012-01-29 22:41:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Poetic Stanziel
Corina Jarr wrote:
This doesn't change anything. The blocks still have massive voting power, and can now place negative votes to their opponents.

But the sheep are dumb, and if you give them anything more complex than a single instruction, they get confused and end up not voting. Big smile

Easy enough to direct 6000 Goons to vote for The Mittani and to vote against a single so-and-so candidate. It becomes more difficult and time consuming when trying to divvy up those 6000 votes to spread around the votes against to multiple candidates. Apathy increases as the number of instructions to the sheep increase.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2012-01-29 22:42:33 UTC
Botleten wrote:
Im gonna laugh when Mittens gets re-elected. Maybe if you publish enough articles with horrifically stupid ideas oh how to keep Mittani from getting elected one of them will actually not get completely ignored and/or laughed at.

Actually, I'm a The Mittani fan.

I don't think Mittens would get enough negative votes to affect his overall standing. He is Man of the Year (2011).
Shazzam Vokanavom
Doomheim
#9 - 2012-01-29 22:55:36 UTC
VOTAGEDDON

1 vote for, 1 vote against, end up with negative net. CCP biomass your candidate. Twisted
CCP Guard
C C P
C C P Alliance
#10 - 2012-02-01 10:37:47 UTC
Moved to Jita Park. Please keep CSM related threads in the designated forum sections.

CCP Guard | EVE Community Developer | @CCP_Guard
Red Templar
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#11 - 2012-02-01 12:44:08 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
This doesn't change anything. The blocks still have massive voting power, and can now place negative votes to their opponents.

But the sheep are dumb, and if you give them anything more complex than a single instruction, they get confused and end up not voting. Big smile

Easy enough to direct 6000 Goons to vote for The Mittani and to vote against a single so-and-so candidate. It becomes more difficult and time consuming when trying to divvy up those 6000 votes to spread around the votes against to multiple candidates. Apathy increases as the number of instructions to the sheep increase.

Snot Shot, is that you? I see a lot of Baaa-Baaa in your posts. Not surprised though. You both have the same air about you.

So what you propose it that a bunch of no-names would be elected? All worthy and opposing candidates will just eliminate each other, and we end up with some random dude that no one noticed and only his mom voted for him?
Yeah thats gonna make the game better. For sure.

[b]For Love. For Peace. For Honor.

For None of the Above.

For Pony![/b]
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#12 - 2012-02-01 17:15:34 UTC
A player having a mom, gets my vote guaranteed.

The only bad thing about this idea, is that it tries to stop the inevitable **** storm really. Everyone is trying to come up with ideas to stop it, but I dont see any really working, I suppose.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
None ofthe Above
#13 - 2012-02-02 00:19:57 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
tl;dr - Every account gets two votes, a VOTE FOR applied to a candidate, and a VOTE AGAINST applied to a candidate.

Full post


So the same mechanisms to get large blocks to robovote for candidates, could be used to virtually assassinate an opponent's candidacy?

I appreciate the thought of being able to vote against a problem candidate, but I fear this could too easily be meta'ed into eliminating dissenting voices.

Term limits (again) and recall procedures (which should be very hard to avoid gaming) maybe other ways of dealing with this.

Something that's been on my mind recently, we are voting for a council but only get one vote? Perhaps if we got to pick a field of 7 instead, each counting as one vote.

Or the transferable vote idea.

But obviously the best idea to fix the CSM is to vote None ofthe Above.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#14 - 2012-02-02 09:39:57 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Botleten wrote:
Im gonna laugh when Mittens gets re-elected. Maybe if you publish enough articles with horrifically stupid ideas oh how to keep Mittani from getting elected one of them will actually not get completely ignored and/or laughed at.

Actually, I'm a The Mittani fan.

I don't think Mittens would get enough negative votes to affect his overall standing. He is Man of the Year (2011).


Another Mittani Zealot Roll

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#15 - 2012-02-02 11:47:56 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
This doesn't change anything. The blocks still have massive voting power, and can now place negative votes to their opponents.

But the sheep are dumb, and if you give them anything more complex than a single instruction, they get confused and end up not voting. Big smile


That's a bit of a harsh way to explain why hi-sec can't get a CSM elected but I suppose you're entitled to express your opinions in the way you think best, and the facts are on your side.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#16 - 2012-02-02 12:15:36 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
tl;dr - Every account gets two votes, a VOTE FOR applied to a candidate, and a VOTE AGAINST applied to a candidate.

Full post


You're right, adding a negative vote would cause the large power blocks to have to appeal to a broader audience, and that's a good thing.

But you also give the large power blocks the power to strike down their most powerful rivals and ensure they don't get elected despite being a popular candidate. In the end, anyone wanting to get elected would have to toe the line with the power block in order to dodge their huge no-vote bullets.

The power block group could also game the system and make all sorts of noise with one candidate and paint him as a target for all the negative votes and then come voting time, vote for their real candidate as the false one goes down in flames.

It's just an unnecessary complication to the process IMO.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#17 - 2012-02-02 16:18:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Weaselior
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
This doesn't change anything. The blocks still have massive voting power, and can now place negative votes to their opponents.

But the sheep are dumb, and if you give them anything more complex than a single instruction, they get confused and end up not voting. Big smile

Easy enough to direct 6000 Goons to vote for The Mittani and to vote against a single so-and-so candidate. It becomes more difficult and time consuming when trying to divvy up those 6000 votes to spread around the votes against to multiple candidates. Apathy increases as the number of instructions to the sheep increase.


whenever we have two candidates we have a script that divides everyone so we have votes spread appropriately and then pops up a notice on goonfleet.com to each pilot reminding you to vote, giving you a link, and telling you who you specifically need to vote for

im sure it would be ever so difficult to modify that to game this system too

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#18 - 2012-02-03 02:37:32 UTC
War Kitten wrote:
The power block group could also game the system and make all sorts of noise with one candidate and paint him as a target for all the negative votes and then come voting time, vote for their real candidate as the false one goes down in flames.

Works for enemies too, you can threaten someone with a ton of negative votes and actually use them on someone else (hopefully people won't vote for a candidate being threatened with e-negreps)
Weaselior wrote:
whenever we have two candidates we have a script that divides everyone so we have votes spread appropriately and then pops up a notice on goonfleet.com to each pilot reminding you to vote, giving you a link, and telling you who you specifically need to vote for

im sure it would be ever so difficult to modify that to game this system too

Eh, you make democracy sound so easy.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?