These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

New Dev Blog: CSM election results

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sahara
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2012-03-25 03:32:48 UTC
So how many of the elected CSM members actually get to go to Iceland?
Lapine Davion
Outer Ring Applied Logistics
#42 - 2012-03-25 05:56:08 UTC
Seven

[b]Don't worry about posting with your main!  Post with your brain! "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."[/b]
Anela Cistine
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#43 - 2012-03-25 06:00:18 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
What do they represent exactly is moot, but if 2/3 of characters logged in are in hisec, certainly that means that hisec is relevant to players.


There is nothing stopping highsec and lowsec candidates from running. If 2/3 of players play primarily in highsec, they should easily be able to stuff the CSM with representatives. Voting is easy, it takes a couple seconds.

The vast majority of voters voted for nullsec or WH candidates. Heck, 17% of voters voted for The Mittani. Most people who voted, voted for winning candidates. Why do you blame the voters and/or CCP for this result, rather than all the thousands of non-voters?
Stirko Hek
New Home Industries
#44 - 2012-03-25 06:15:33 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
This is the last year when you use an entirely unregulated system, right?

Career politicians, virtual and real, inevitably become corrupt (or in some cases, more corrupt) so a maximum term limit should be in place.
Eve is more than Blob-land/Bore-sec, there should be at least one seat per area of Eve (High/Low/Null). CSM6 and their complete ignorance in everything not bore-sec has already done heaps of damage to high/low, not their fault really as they are greedy egocentrics like everyone else, but a homogeneous council is BAD for Eve .. especially when you at CCP are even more clueless as to what is happening in the game (ref: FW presentation).

FW is pretty much dead for me. RP has been all but killed off, systems flip in less time than it takes for me to complete a work shift, visiting super-blobs and Titan bridges are becoming ever more frequent, it is still Rust'or'Bust (Winmatar) 90% of the time .. you have in short managed to make it BORING!


In short, your system doesn't work how I want it to so you need to change it to a system that works in a manner that pleases me. With logic like that, you'll go far in life.
Prodomicer
Doomheim
#45 - 2012-03-25 06:52:46 UTC
It's all a SCAM !
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2012-03-25 07:05:43 UTC
Thanks to everyone who voted!

Treb

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Francisco Bizzaro
#47 - 2012-03-25 07:06:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Francisco Bizzaro
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
Tau Cabalander wrote:

There was a disturbing number of young account voters.

Yep thats a lot of one month chars - 8,447 of them

Yeah, in principle CCP should do something about that. Unlikely though, since it's good business for them. That's a lot of PLEX burned.

59109 = 16.63% gives a user base of 355k accounts. So the CSM election gives them a 2.4% population spike once a year.

And if you think of it in dollar terms at $15 an account, 8447 votes brings in about $125k. So if all they cost are a few trips to Iceland, the CSM probably almost pays for itself.

(Or from another perspective, if the Goons are paying the CSM's expenses, I guess it's only appropriate that they chair it ...)

Anyhow, congratulations to the winners, and good job, Hans.
Lapine Davion
Outer Ring Applied Logistics
#48 - 2012-03-25 07:38:50 UTC
I was under the impression that accounts with less than 2 months on them couldn't vote. Is that incorrect?

[b]Don't worry about posting with your main!  Post with your brain! "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."[/b]
Bent Barrel
#49 - 2012-03-25 07:49:19 UTC
Lapine Davion wrote:
I was under the impression that accounts with less than 2 months on them couldn't vote. Is that incorrect?


this would interest me too ... I mean there's always a minimum age to vote in every election in the real world ....

as for the highsec vs rest of the world discussion, look at it this way:

zerosec residents need to cooperate in some way to be successful. higsec people do not. the CSM7 results pretty much show this.
Francisco Bizzaro
#50 - 2012-03-25 07:59:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Francisco Bizzaro
Bent Barrel wrote:
Lapine Davion wrote:
I was under the impression that accounts with less than 2 months on them couldn't vote. Is that incorrect?


this would interest me too ... I mean there's always a minimum age to vote in every election in the real world ....

I don't know what the rule is, but Diagoras seems to have counted 30-day old characters in his stats.

To be fair, I think 8447 refers to characters "at least 30 days and less than 250 days", so it's not as if all of those accounts were bought for the election. There was an expansion and I think a Power-of-2 promotion in that timespan.

The "8447 month old voters" viewpoint is probably too cynical. Amusing, though.
Florestan Bronstein
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#51 - 2012-03-25 08:00:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Florestan Bronstein
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:

If i had a MMORPG and found out that a mere 20% of my players log in to enjoy my endgame content, and the rest are scattered in places where they're gonna run out of a reason to play sooner than later, i would kinda worry about it.

20% would be pretty good - the percentage of WoW subscribers that engage in end-game content (raiding) was usually estimated at half that (pre-raid finder), the other 90% are apparently happy leveling alts and completing achievements.
Josef Djugashvilis
#52 - 2012-03-25 08:29:33 UTC
The Boy Done Good

The Goons organized and ran a successful campaign.

That is how elections are won.

This is not a signature.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#53 - 2012-03-25 09:12:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Indahmawar Fazmarai
Anela Cistine wrote:
[quote=Indahmawar Fazmarai]What do they represent exactly is moot, but if 2/3 of characters logged in are in hisec, certainly that means that hisec is relevant to players. [/quote

There is nothing stopping highsec and lowsec candidates from running. If 2/3 of players play primarily in highsec, they should easily be able to stuff the CSM with representatives. Voting is easy, it takes a couple seconds

The vast majority of voters voted for nullsec or WH candidates. Heck, 17% of voters voted for The Mittani. Most people who voted, voted for winning candidates. Why do you blame the voters and/or CCP for this result, rather than all the thousands of non-voters?


You are American, aren't you? Maybe when you listen that some poor devils are starving in some forgotten corner of the world you think they should go and eat at some Mc Donalds instead of starve?

There are many ways to rig an election, and one of the most successful ones is by ensuring that only those that vote for you are actually interested in voting, and then blame everyone else for being too lazy to vote.

See, if I was veing elected by 50,000 measly votes out of 350,000 potential voters, i would make everything possible to ensure that most of those other 300,000 suckers never bother to vote... lest they vote for someone else.

BTW, out of 10,000 new votes in this election, 8,500 are from bloc alts created precisely to rig the election, pump Mitten's ego and act as a firewall against the threat posed by having only 7 tickets to Iceland and the rising of alternate organized candidates (like Hans or Issler).

As i said, the CSM elections are democracy at its finest... dystopia style.


As a final reflexion, think of this: when only those who compromise are allowed to talk, then they will feel entitled to dismiss those who didn't compromise, and so this"entitlement of the compromised" lies in the foundations of every tyranny of the few upon the many.
Josef Djugashvilis
#54 - 2012-03-25 09:27:48 UTC
As much as I am against Mittens because of his ego problem, I am going to defend him to the extent that if CCP had any concerns about how he got his votes, they would have carried out an investigation and acted on any issues they found.

He won because the vast majority of Eve players did not care enough to organize to beat him.

Mittens can hardly be blamed for that.

This is not a signature.
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#55 - 2012-03-25 09:34:06 UTC
Looking forwards to another year of tears and conspiracy theories.

10k votes 4 lyfe!
Francisco Bizzaro
#56 - 2012-03-25 10:32:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Francisco Bizzaro
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
As much as I am against Mittens because of his ego problem, I am going to defend him to the extent that if CCP had any concerns about how he got his votes, they would have carried out an investigation and acted on any issues they found.

Most assuredly not. I don't think there are a lot of rules to this election beyond one-account-one-vote, so it's hard to call someone out for breaking rules.

But on the other hand, there's no reason to believe that CCP will be naive about the results. The CSM is an advisory council with no actual authority, and CCP can choose to listen to their advice or not. CCP is a business which wants to make customers happy, so the CSM has power only to the extent that they accurately represent the feelings of the player base. If it's clear from the stats that one or another candidate has skewed the numbers and is advocating for a niche interest, CCP has every opportunity to ignore them, whether they do it publicly or not.

Quote:

He won because the vast majority of Eve players did not care enough to organize to beat him.

This is almost a tautology. The Eve players who are inclined to organize politically are exactly those who are already involved in null-sec alliance politics. The others are not organized exactly because that aspect of the game/meta-game doesn't appeal to them. So they are disenfranchised unless they engage in a process that doesn't interest them for a game that they pay a subscription for "fun". Fortunately, for the reasons mentioned above, the dis-enfranchisement isn't particularly serious.

There's often a hint of blame when people comment on how non-bloc voters are disinterested or disorganized. But it's a perfectly valid play-style - and one which tends to vote with their dollars, which in the end is the most effective anyway.

Regardless of Mittani's "mandate" among the 17% who voted, CCP is most interested in keeping happy the 83% who didn't, so nobody needs to fret about the results. The Disorganized Non-Voter Party is still the most powerful voting bloc in Eve.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#57 - 2012-03-25 10:59:34 UTC
See this:

1: The Mittani 5,365 / The Mittani10,058

2: Seleene 3,813 / Two Step 4,150

3: UAxDEATH 3,320 / Elise Randolph 3,714

4: Trebor Daehdoow 3,306 / Greene Lee 3,329

5: Killer2 2,925 / Trebor Daehdoow 3,184

6: White Tree 2,539 / Kelduum Revaan 3,163

7: Vile Rat 2,240 / Seleene 2,845

8: Meissa Anunthiel 2,086 / UAxDEATH 2,465

9: Draco Llasa 1,986 / Hans Jagerblitzen 2,439

10: Elise Randolph 1,747 / Meissa Anunthiel 2,289

11: Prometheus Exenthal 1,341 / Dovinian 2,284

12: Krutoj 1,090 / Issler Dainze 1,561

13:Two Step 956 / Alekseyev Karrde 1,533

14:Darius III 921 / Darius III 1,282

Out of 10,000 new votes, we know that 8,500 have been rigged by the blocs (they can be tracked even from within CCP Diagora's daily updates)

Also, candidates aimed to "people who didn't vote" gathered no less than 4,000 votes.

Also a "transversal" candidate such as Seleene has taken a serious blow (whereas Meissa didn't).

If you ask me, CSM 7 has actually lost voters compared to CSM 6. 4,000 new voters from Issler and Hans only reflect as 1,500 extra actual votes.

So, with all blocs full speed ahead, the CSM 7 barely achieved to call for actual new voters.

This election seriously smells of FAIL.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#58 - 2012-03-25 11:12:35 UTC
Francisco Bizzaro wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
As much as I am against Mittens because of his ego problem, I am going to defend him to the extent that if CCP had any concerns about how he got his votes, they would have carried out an investigation and acted on any issues they found.

Most assuredly not. I don't think there are a lot of rules to this election beyond one-account-one-vote, so it's hard to call someone out for breaking rules.

But on the other hand, there's no reason to believe that CCP will be naive about the results. The CSM is an advisory council with no actual authority, and CCP can choose to listen to their advice or not. CCP is a business which wants to make customers happy, so the CSM has power only to the extent that they accurately represent the feelings of the player base. If it's clear from the stats that one or another candidate has skewed the numbers and is advocating for a niche interest, CCP has every opportunity to ignore them, whether they do it publicly or not.

Quote:

He won because the vast majority of Eve players did not care enough to organize to beat him.

This is almost a tautology. The Eve players who are inclined to organize politically are exactly those who are already involved in null-sec alliance politics. The others are not organized exactly because that aspect of the game/meta-game doesn't appeal to them. So they are disenfranchised unless they engage in a process that doesn't interest them for a game that they pay a subscription for "fun". Fortunately, for the reasons mentioned above, the dis-enfranchisement isn't particularly serious.

There's often a hint of blame when people comment on how non-bloc voters are disinterested or disorganized. But it's a perfectly valid play-style - and one which tends to vote with their dollars, which in the end is the most effective anyway.

Regardless of Mittani's "mandate" among the 17% who voted, CCP is most interested in keeping happy the 83% who didn't, so nobody needs to fret about the results. The Disorganized Non-Voter Party is still the most powerful voting bloc in Eve.


That measly 17% are the ones who talk to CCP. The rest just quit once they come across EVE's shortcomings.

Certainly CCP is doing itself a poor favor by not listening to those of us who vote with our wallet AND make noise rather than leave in silence. I would be out of here since Crucible if weren't because I pre-paid this account for 6 months, and certainly will stop bothering myself about this game once that money runs out.

So in a way they can perfectly dismiss me, as I am not a paying customer any more... after 3+ years and 800+ euros, that is.
Triskian
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2012-03-25 11:53:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Triskian
Diagoras, I'd like to see some more breakdowns:

Per candidate voter "age" numbers.

Alliance/Corp affiliation of voters, you can cull any group with under 100 voters.

Per candidate Alliance/Corp affiliation of voters.
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#60 - 2012-03-25 11:56:32 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
~endless pathetic whining~.

Omg, just stop it Roll

CSM5: 8,598 votes from month-old accounts, or 21.8%
CSM 6: 7,200 month-old votes, or 14.67%
CSM7: 8,447, or 14.29%

There is absolutely NOTHING out of the ordinary here. If anything, this election seems a lot less 'rigged' than CSM5.

I am not affiliated with Goonswarm or K162 in any way and I voted for The Mittani and Two Step. I know several other people who also gave vote(s) to Mittens even though they are primarily w-space or even hisec players.

Hisec zombies don't vote because they don't really care about the game, most are just visitors. So they get no voice in the CSM. Working as it should.

.