Jita Park Speakers Corner

More people need to get worked up about the process of voting for seven people to get drunk in Iceland on your PLEX's dime and seven more people to Skype with them while CCP :ccp:.

Argument precludes discussion.


I don't have a side and that is the problem, you can talk of the ideals but people are voting for sides and on bias.

Jenshae Chiroptera, does your fursuit double as a hugbox?

I don't mean to offend, I'm just asking questions.

I believe that it does not matter who gets voted into the CSM. I think the merit in an abstain shows CCP how many people did make the effort to vote but have no faith in CSM or the candidates.

Thus, it would demonstrate how seriously CCP should regard the options of the CSM based on how many people are saying, "These people do not represent me."

I agree with an active abstain, it would be interesting to see by what % voting participation goes up if this were to go in.
It's a good metric for CCP as well.

notsureifserious.jpg

Indeed. However, it will need to be coupled with some notification from CCP. I suspect that many players are in hopeless apathy.

CCP - Give us the "NONE OF THE ABOVE" voting option so we can vote out the whole twisted from its original intention CSM system. Or give us the option to vote for OR AGAINST each delegate.

What we have come to is a table full of people who represent their own individual interests and not the interests of the players, except the players who share their interests by some sheer accident.

Every government attempting a representational form of government has realized that an elected body of "at-large" delegates cannot represent anything but the single line of thought which elected them, so you can have one or one million representatives, but they are all representing only one slice of thought, which is far from the majority, of the constituents.

You must devise a way to to have delegates elected by different portions of the players in order to represent more than one line of thought. governments do this by region determined by residence. We have a problem establishing residence in space, but it would not be impossible to determine where a player has spent 75% of their time between one election and the next. Computers can do this by always knowing if a player is in null, low sec or high sec WHILE LOGGED ON and doing some mouse and/or keyboard activity during the period. Knowing some activity is happening is important or candidates will just park a toon in a different region to "rig" the election. Then when players attempt to vote, the candidates who can only represent the region in which they have residency, will be shown on their ballot. To keep with the representational method of most governments, the number of representatives would be determined by the number of residents of each region, thus giving each player equal representational opportunities.

As it is now, voter apathy leads to a few people backed by large alliances getting elected to their Icelandic Vacation Program. Every year, I keep waiting to see a candidate whose platform has anything on it which seems of interest to the quite popular segment of players who pursue the same type of game play as I prefer.

If you intend to keep it as it is now - simplify it and let the five largest alliances send 3 delegates each. You will most likely get the same guys as you have now.

Give us the "none of the above" or the "yes or no" vote and see how much voter apathy there is then.

Most nullsec players have at least one empire alt that they actually log in and do things with, so basically your proposal is stupid.

What about someone whose character is a trader type who likes to run things between highsec, lowsec, and null? What region does that person belong to?

If you feel your point of view represents the majority of Eve players, get off your fat butt and organize those players into a voting bloc. If they actually don't care, then guess what, that means they actually don't care. There's not some evil external force that stops them from caring.

You're just lazy and want CCP to organize your voting bloc for you. Good luck with that.

Also, why do people keep comparing the CSM to a representational government? The CSM exists to communicate the desires of the players to CCP, so that CCP can turn a profit on internet spaceships. If you abstain (deliberately or not) from the CSM vote and continue to pay for your subscription then the message you're sending to CCP is pretty obvious. If you don't vote and then cancel your subscription, CCP is going to pay even more attention to the CSM so it can hang on to its existing player base.