These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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] The Independent Voter's Guide to the CSM 7 Elections

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Billy Gunslinger
#41 - 2012-03-01 01:33:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Billy Gunslinger
Raivi wrote:
Trebor, everything I've seen and heard about you suggests you're a very hard worker who deserves reelection. However this thread is a bit silly. No "voters guide" written by an active candidate can ever claim to be impartial. This is an example of pidgenholing candidates on a level nobody else (not even Mittens) has attempted.

Just because one or two of the "bloc" candidates has shown that they don't care about concerns from outside their bloc, you have decided to paint all the candidates supported by a 0.0 alliance with the same brush.

Take Elise for an example. He won alternate spots mostly through non-allied votes in the past (PL doesn't have enough votes to get anyone anywhere by itself) and he only received endorsements from other alliances well into his campaign. What evidence have you seen that he intends to ignore the interests of independent players? If Nulli Secunda endorsed you tomorrow, would you tell independent players not to vote for you? Voters should judge candidates by their actions and platforms.

Also, statements about how certain candidates will easily win seats (implying that undecided voters should ignore them) when many of them have almost no chance of reaching your vote total seems a bit disingenuous.

I actually agree with large chunks of your assessments, and I would like to see you on CSM 7, but don't try to claim that this thread is for the benefit of undecided voters.


I agree that there will be never complete 100% impartiality from Trebor who wrote this guide. But if the best counter one can give is that, then I'm sure the OP (and the voters) can still live with it. It's still one hell of a insightful analysis.

And besides, a fellow PL corp mate defending Elise only supports your own bias that you accuse of Trebor of. So people should also take your advice with a grain of salt
Arno Gunnarr
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#42 - 2012-03-01 01:39:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Arno Gunnarr
Great read,

Knowing Hans for 2 1/2 years, he is easy to work with, very wiling in a sense that I do not see too often from the MMO crowd.

He has a very constant, patient, honest, empathetic and passionate attitude in the best and worst of times. I really cannot say that about everyone I have played with. More so, if I had not believed he was electable or capable, I would not be voting him. I take my CSM votes very seriously, especially after the CCP fiasco of 2011.

I suck at endorsements.

-Vote for Hans. receive a Hans job!-

and

C*CK BLOCK THE BLOC




...meh, had to.

Nooblet
Sneaky Noob
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#43 - 2012-03-01 01:45:36 UTC
My name is Sneaky Noob and I endorse the product/service.

Sneaky Noob - Editor-in-Chief of The Late Nite News ™
Revolution Rising
Last-Light Holdings
#44 - 2012-03-01 01:49:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Revolution Rising
I'm really hoping to get Seleene, Two Step and Trebor back in with my votes and votes of some people close to me.

I really think they are the best bet for change in eve, which is sorely needed - not a change away from 0.0 or a change away from PVP - but a change to INCLUDE a bunch of other things.

Wormholes, FW, Industry, Market, Low-sec, all of these mechanics, gameplay types and issues require refining, thinking about and improvement. Perhaps they will also look at the mechanics behind 100MN Tengu's and Tracking Titans.

We've had maybe 3-4 years now of PVP changes, New ships, new mechanics for POS's and I think we're on Sov version 4.1 (confirm? lol) and still no change in the aforementioned topics.

These are the things I HOPE Seleene, Two Step and Trebor can start to tackle if re-elected. They all have experience, level heads and above all passion for the game, CCP and CSM.

I really hope others will vote with me. But if not, I would never call any candidate a joke vote or wasted vote.

In turn I really hope the CSM who DOES get elected, looks at the voting afterwards and takes a good look at what other candidates stood for and got votes for.

Those voice still need to be heard even if they didn't get a candidate elected.

If the CSM election process has a flaw - that is it. And I am sure these candidates are aware of that fact more than any other.

.
Ejen Nailo
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#45 - 2012-03-01 01:56:58 UTC
+1. This thread is very helpful and informative. Thank you and I wish you luck.

Oh and vote for Hans xD
Surat Do'Cameran
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#46 - 2012-03-01 02:44:33 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
Wow, and now we are down to personal attacks.

I am also a two time elected to the CSM candidate and have 8 years committed to Eve. I've run a mining corp for over six years and an alliance for 5 years. I've experienced all aspects of Eve and proved in the past I am committed to the Eve community. I have a background in software engineering (42 years) and direct games industry experience.

To claim voting for me is a wasted vote and support for me is "sympathy" is both wrong and insulting.

So miner's don't accept that your voices are unimportant and vour support is just sympathy.

And to everyone else reading this nonsense "guide" ask yourself how Trebor made your life in Eve better recently. I expect you'll be struggling to find an answer.

Issler Dainze
The Miner's Friend
CSM 7 Candidate



Sit down, shut up and go back to mining trit to turn into ships that the rest of us can go pew in. You were an ALT for most of your CSM time until a "main" stepped down. You raised no issues within the CSM in your time and are quoted in t he CSM minutes as being unable to figure out T3 production business models ad stating that T3 ship were of "dubious" value. You were out of touch and ignorant then and are so now.


As for the issues that Trebor has pushed, I guess POS fuel changes and UI improvements are useless to a carebear like yourself?

Go away and stop filling the forum drives with your drivel. Stop campaigning against candidates with actual ability and splitting the vote.
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2012-03-01 02:52:44 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Very good - if not obvious- points Trebor. Voting for a bloc candidate in a bloc that you don't belong to is voting for someone who won't represent you. This has been made explicitly clear by the most prominent bloc candidate. Yet I still think people will be dumb enough to throw those votes away.

At least you tried.

I will continue to do my best, but anyone who agrees with the general thesis must also be willing to do their part, spread the word, and increase turnout for viable non-bloc candidates.

None ofthe Above wrote:
For example there are several candidates on the ballot that are intentionally there as a joke, a few more that are a joke but not on purpose. Others you place in that category have every right to take offense at being called "comic relief".

Perhaps "long shots" might be a better term.

In retrospect, I agree that Long Shots is a better term. I will update the post and make this change.

Illectroculus Defined wrote:
I disagree with your classification of Skye as a comedy candidate, her father is more experienced than most of the candidates on the roster.

Skye was one of several candidates whose classification I agonized over. However, I believe the classification name change noted above addresses your concern.

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2012-03-01 02:54:14 UTC
Kelduum Revaan wrote:
To be honest, and from Trebor's definition - "candidates who do not have previous CSM experience, but have demonstrated a serious commitment to the game and the CSM process" - I would count myself more as a 'Serious Contender'.

Kelduum, you are another candidate who is hard to classify. In the end, I decided you were a special case because I think you've got enough of a constituency to get elected, whereas Hans is still contending to get on.

Kossaw wrote:
For my 2c I'd say that Seleene is the exception to this rule.

Seleene does not have have the support of a bloc this year, AFAIK.

Raivi wrote:
Trebor, everything I've seen and heard about you suggests you're a very hard worker who deserves reelection. However this thread is a bit silly. No "voters guide" written by an active candidate can ever claim to be impartial.

I make no claims that it is impartial; in fact, I specifically disclose my conflict right at the top of the post!

I am merely making a reasoned argument in favor of a voting strategy that I believe will maximize non-bloc influence in CSM 7. I don't think bloc influence is bad; I merely do not wish it to be disproportionate.

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Lux Exterior
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2012-03-01 03:39:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Lux Exterior
Revolution Rising wrote:

...almost all of it has nerfed industry and buffer 0.0 in wasteful ways.


Please expand on this, how?

Revolution Rising wrote:

We have now got t3 battlecruisers which are basically useless for anyone not in 0.0.
We have balance and change looked at for large fleet fighting, but nothing for industry or non-political groups.
More Nerfs for empire POS base manufacturing - which in turn means a buff for t2 bpo holders.


Tier 3 battlecruisers are very widely used in highsec for suicide ganking, I agree they have no PvE application in common with most T2/T3 ships, what's your point?
What does Industry need other than a constant flow of paying customers, you want improvements to your 'Excel' playstyle interface?
How does someone having a T2 BPO affect your invents please?

Revolution Rising wrote:

The main problem CCP faces with this entire "CSM" idea is that non-political groups don't get a voice.
The few who do seem to want to stand for those smaller non-political groups seem to make little or no headway in these issues.


What mechanism do you want introduced which can represent minority groups, some form of lobbying, like using the forums?

Revolution Rising wrote:

I don't think anyone - even in empire - wants to see spaceships take a huge backseat, but SOME headway must be made on - and I think we're almost there to be honest - recreating the entire industrial base of eve online.

Every change for the past 4-5 years has nerfed industry in some way. Some reports show 2/3rds of mining is bot/afk based.

Plenty of games over the past couple of years have professed to be "sandboxes" but offered little in the way of anything but combat. (Darkfall online, Mortal Online). They have died because they lacked the holistic view of the game. They concentrated just on combat and ended up with a game that just didn't deliver the full range of activities that a sandbox needs to keep players interested.

Don't allow EvE to go down the same road - no matter how reasonable it might seem to continue just updating the "spaceships" and leaving the "carebears" to deal with it.


Without spaceships blowing up you have no game, no-one will buy your stuff, your spreadsheets will become irrelevant.

Face it, you have not made any specific proposals for how you would like to see this game improved, you have made sweeping generalisations about 'politics' and stuffz without suggesting an alternative means of representation and you're agreeing with a guy whose sole platform appears to be identifying a sector of the demographic which he believes is under-represented.

You and your 'thumbsup' supporters are sheep with no clear idea of what they want other than fatter wallets than you have already and hangers full of shiny stuff you never fly.

Poor industrialists indeed, I've never met one!
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#50 - 2012-03-01 04:10:36 UTC
Longshot, reporting for duty

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION
Raivi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#51 - 2012-03-01 04:17:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Raivi
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:

Raivi wrote:
Trebor, everything I've seen and heard about you suggests you're a very hard worker who deserves reelection. However this thread is a bit silly. No "voters guide" written by an active candidate can ever claim to be impartial.

I make no claims that it is impartial; in fact, I specifically disclose my conflict right at the top of the post!

I am merely making a reasoned argument in favor of a voting strategy that I believe will maximize non-bloc influence in CSM 7. I don't think bloc influence is bad; I merely do not wish it to be disproportionate.


You're right about the disclaimer and my phrasing probably leaves something to be desired. To clarify, I would argue that your guide is too biased to be of significant use to an undecided voter. I assume you disagree :)

Your assertion that all nullsec candidates are of equally low value to all independent voters is not backed up by any evidence, as all of your specific arguments about them are aimed only at Mittens.
Your statements that several candidates will easily win (implying that they aren't worth votes) while not mentioning that you are also virtually guaranteed a spot is obviously disingenuous.
I'm glad to see you changed the wording concerning the "troll" candidate, but you seem to have had an initial issue separating the actual trolls from other candidates that have little chance of winning for other reasons.

You seem like a generally reasonable guy, but this "guide" leaves a lot to be desired. A better strategy would be to collect the candidates platforms in a clear format and let the voters cut the wheat from the chaff. The trolls aren't hard to spot.
Revolution Rising
Last-Light Holdings
#52 - 2012-03-01 05:07:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Revolution Rising
Perhaps you should do a search before you say I haven't proposed ideas ;)

That is one, that I could easily find. These posts aren't exactly hidden.

This isn't really the place for those conversations, this is a place for reflection on the candidates and their relation to the issues.

If you wish to try and say that t3 battlecruisers are great ideas to use under low-sec gate guns, or that eve is better off without an industrial expansion.. EVER. Perhaps you should try and make those points in the appropriate places?

Or perhaps your point was that ... oh in fact you didn't make one.

In fact perhaps it was just to be stupid by attacking someone who has wholeheartedly agreed with the fact that the Dirt Nap candidate should be voted for?

Nice job. I'm glad you had the chance to **** up the thread like this. Roll

.
Il Feytid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#53 - 2012-03-01 05:17:33 UTC
Trebor is always willing to give 100% and does not press any agendas that are clearly only because it will benefit him or his alliance. Even when we don't deserve it, he has always been there to communicate with the masses and keep us up to speed with the on goings of the CSM.

I'm still undecided but, I do know a vote for Trebor will not be a wasted vote.
FlashSpawn
Body Count Inc.
Mercenary Coalition
#54 - 2012-03-01 06:14:25 UTC
I endorse this thread and I will be voting for Seleeeenie because he is my father!

Flash
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#55 - 2012-03-01 06:55:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Fon Revedhort
LOL

A no-name mercifully placed me in Long Shots list while asking to vote for himself.

Dude, wanna accept my bet that I'll score more votes than you? Say, 100 mil. Is that ok for you? I'm perfectly fine with higher bets as well, I'm just not sure wheather you'd risk your money.

edit: oh, originally it was a 'comic relief' list. Nice! Blink

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#56 - 2012-03-01 07:28:10 UTC
Raivi wrote:

Also, statements about how certain candidates will easily win seats (implying that undecided voters should ignore them) when many of them have almost no chance of reaching your vote total seems a bit disingenuous.

I actually agree with large chunks of your assessments, and I would like to see you on CSM 7, but don't try to claim that this thread is for the benefit of undecided voters.

The very idea of independent voters needing a guide is dubious - how are they independent if they're governed by a mere guide? What?

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
Vordak Kallager
Descendance.
GoonSwarm.
#57 - 2012-03-01 07:48:42 UTC
Fon Revedhort wrote:
Raivi wrote:

Also, statements about how certain candidates will easily win seats (implying that undecided voters should ignore them) when many of them have almost no chance of reaching your vote total seems a bit disingenuous.

I actually agree with large chunks of your assessments, and I would like to see you on CSM 7, but don't try to claim that this thread is for the benefit of undecided voters.

The very idea of independent voters needing a guide is dubious - how are they independent if they're governed by a mere guide? What?


Even if you do secure a seat due to Russian drones voting for you, hopefully the other CSM members will ostracize you because of your blatant racism.

Sa souvraya niende misain ye.
Marco Bartoli
The Unknown Bar and Pub
#58 - 2012-03-01 07:58:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Marco Bartoli
This is a good guide. Trebor, Meissa and Two step (and Seleene) all made great contributions to the CSM process, and Hans has some really great ideas that would be nice to see represented on the CSM, and they all really do deserve votes. However, I'm still enthusiastic about a CSM7 chaired by Mittens considering how productive CSM6 managed to be in comparison to those CSMs before it, and the general accomplishments it made especially in handling Incarna.
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#59 - 2012-03-01 08:10:02 UTC
Vordak Kallager wrote:
Fon Revedhort wrote:
Raivi wrote:

Also, statements about how certain candidates will easily win seats (implying that undecided voters should ignore them) when many of them have almost no chance of reaching your vote total seems a bit disingenuous.

I actually agree with large chunks of your assessments, and I would like to see you on CSM 7, but don't try to claim that this thread is for the benefit of undecided voters.

The very idea of independent voters needing a guide is dubious - how are they independent if they're governed by a mere guide? What?


Even if you do secure a seat due to Russian drones voting for you, hopefully the other CSM members will ostracize you because of your blatant racism.

You do realize you're wishing CSM to run at reduced efficiency, don't you? Straight

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
Hans Roaming
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2012-03-01 09:04:57 UTC
Seleene as a CCP dev brought us wormholes and has worked hard as a CSM candidate. I think that knowing both sides of the fence is an asset that any CSM team should have so I'll be voting for Seleene and so should you.