These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

So why is 20% of the game's population representing the entire CSM?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
JonnyRandom
#1 - 2012-08-01 20:56:27 UTC
We know that the game's population is split something like 70% hisec, 10% low sec, 20% null-sec. Something like that, the exact figures are not important.
Yet it seems that the CSM is composed entirely out of representatives of big alliances in null-sec. So the CSM which is the voice all of Eve's population represents only 20% of the game's population... Shocked

I know there have been talks with CSM of how to bring more people into nullsec? But why are people that already live in nullsec trying to find ways to bring hi-sec into null-sec? Seems kind of backwards to me. I'd rather people like myself, that live in hi-sec, had more influence in finding ways to make null-sec more attractive to us.

That's just 2 thoughts I wanted to bring up... not sure if this has been discussed or not before.
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#2 - 2012-08-01 22:04:31 UTC
I have two counterpoints:
1) The current CSM is not entirely composed of representatives of null-sec alliances. Several members, Inssler notably, are not active in null-sec, and some of those who are, are not representatives of alliances even if they have an outlook shared by many of the members of null-sec alliances. During the elections that became obvious. I think the only two sec-status areas that had one clear, common candidate were WH space and FW in low-sec. I may be wrong about those two, but I did not see any other area have only one candidate or one type of candidate.
2) If you want to change it, organise a change in CSM8. I'd like to see more play-styles represented in the CSM, or voting reform, but if null-sec, low-sec and WH space all organise their collective 30% player-base or whatever to vote, while only 10% of hi-sec votes, then that's not something that should hurt the organised voters. Then it's the unorganised voters who should organise.

As for whom should decide what null-sec should be like: I would like to think that those who know how a particular area or play-style functions should be asked first what should be changed. There are plenty of things that I'd like changed about sov-0.0, and I can substantiate those opinions compared to my opinions about BP invention, which I know absolutely nothing about.
If I had tried invention and could form an educated opinion on the subject it'd be a different matter.

I don't say this to be patronising, but it's just about not screwing someone over because whoever is doing the changes don't know anything about what they're doing, what effects the changes would have, and what the people using the feature wants. That of course goes for everything in the game.
Blawrf McTaggart
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#3 - 2012-08-01 23:25:52 UTC
because the 20% is the only % that matters heh
Gevlin
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2012-08-02 00:16:59 UTC
Note most nullsec players have alts and alt corps in hi sec especially since it is extremely difficult to live in null sec without Nita access

Someday I will have the time to play. For now it is mining afk in High sec. In Cheap ships
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#5 - 2012-08-02 00:35:01 UTC
Incredibly ignorant or troll post, I can't decide which. I'm leaning to towards trolling, no one can be that stupid surely?
Rengerel en Distel
#6 - 2012-08-02 01:21:05 UTC
Most null sec alliances have to deal with all parts of the game. There are very few issues that are solely found in high sec - crimewatch and to a degree war decs are about it. It's good to have dedicated people for FW and wormholes, but beyond that, most null sec alliances take part in everything else.

With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#7 - 2012-08-02 06:53:53 UTC
The CSM is elected by the people who vote. If the 70% of people gave a damn about who gets on the CSM, they could easily elect their candidates.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#8 - 2012-08-02 06:55:32 UTC
JonnyRandom wrote:
We know that the game's population is split something like 70% hisec, 10% low sec, 20% null-sec. Something like that, the exact figures are not important.
Yet it seems that the CSM is composed entirely out of representatives of big alliances in null-sec. So the CSM which is the voice all of Eve's population represents only 20% of the game's population... Shocked

I know there have been talks with CSM of how to bring more people into nullsec? But why are people that already live in nullsec trying to find ways to bring hi-sec into null-sec? Seems kind of backwards to me. I'd rather people like myself, that live in hi-sec, had more influence in finding ways to make null-sec more attractive to us.

That's just 2 thoughts I wanted to bring up... not sure if this has been discussed or not before.


The real question you should ask yourself is: why do the 70% that live in hi-sec not produce 70% of the candidates that people want to vote for?

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Brisco County
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#9 - 2012-08-02 07:02:57 UTC
Perhaps because that 20% takes part in the community by voting. Not to mention, that 20% has a lot of alts that live in high-sec, so your statistic begins to look a bit fuzzy.

And, perhaps most importantly, more gentlemen of quality live in null-sec. I wouldn't vote for random high-sec white knights unless they amuse me greatly.
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#10 - 2012-08-02 08:36:01 UTC
That was actually discussed a whole lot for the CSM 7 election. Main thing is that the majority doesn't always win. And its hard being in the minority and not winning as well.


Seemed like you are worried about being force into null. That is another long running issue, and who knows when it will be solved or so.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
JonnyRandom
#11 - 2012-08-02 13:35:06 UTC
So, from your responses it seems the problem stems from the fact that even though Hi-sec may have the majority of players, only very few of them ever vote. Why do you think this might be? What steps can be done (both by CCP and the players) to increase voter turnout?

Certainly you can't expect a new player that's been playing for a month or less to even understand what the CSM is doing. Do we need to worry about that? Do we care about what new players think?
Dervinus
LowKey Ops
Shadow Cartel
#12 - 2012-08-02 14:37:11 UTC
JonnyRandom wrote:
So, from your responses it seems the problem stems from the fact that even though Hi-sec may have the majority of players, only very few of them ever vote. Why do you think this might be? What steps can be done (both by CCP and the players) to increase voter turnout?

Certainly you can't expect a new player that's been playing for a month or less to even understand what the CSM is doing. Do we need to worry about that? Do we care about what new players think?


Players less than a month old can't vote, can they?

o7 toonies
Cyprus Black
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#13 - 2012-08-02 14:37:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Cyprus Black
I'm pretty sure nullsec population is a tad lower than 20%. Didn't CCP say at fanfest that it's around 15% ?

*edit* stupid iPhone auto misspeller.

Summary of EvEs last four expansions: http://imgur.com/ZL5SM33
JonnyRandom
#14 - 2012-08-02 14:46:50 UTC
Dervinus wrote:


Players less than a month old can't vote, can they?


I'm not sure. What do you consider a cut-off point for new players? How long does an average player play before something finally *clicks* and they just start "getting" Eve and are thus now hooked forever and are no longer a newbie? 2 months? 6 months?

Regardless of that, I'm still interested to know if you guys think that newer player opinions should matter in the CSM.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#15 - 2012-08-02 15:38:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
As far as the CSM goes, I think it's more important to have people representing parts of the game that need attention, or which are working but enjoyed by a small minority (WH dwellers, e.g.). Sov nullsec is badly broken, and it has been for years, so I don't mind that sov nullsec is heavily represented on the CSM. Highsec is actually well represented now, between Kelduum, Issler and Alekseyev--though Kelduum and Issler both ran on platforms which are of interest to people everywhere in the game. If you acknowledge how much of nullsec war is fought against various alliances' high-sec logistics, Aleks' platform could be said to be of interest to nullsec as well.

rodyas wrote:
Seemed like you are worried about being force into null. That is another long running issue, and who knows when it will be solved or so.


I'd hope that the lesson of Incarna has seeped in: If you try to force people to do X, the odds are that it will end poorly, because you wouldn't feel the need to force people if you thought that X had enough intrinsic merit to attract people on its own.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
MotherMoon
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#16 - 2012-08-02 19:22:38 UTC
why is only 40% of americans voted for the president.

Why does only 4% of a state show up to vote for congress members

Why did you make this bad topic?

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg
JonnyRandom
#17 - 2012-08-02 19:46:55 UTC
If you had read the thread, you'd see that I am looking for two things:
1. Is this an issue that needs to be addressed?
2. How can this issue be addressed?
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#18 - 2012-08-03 00:25:26 UTC
JonnyRandom wrote:
If you had read the thread, you'd see that I am looking for two things:
1. Is this an issue that needs to be addressed?
2. How can this issue be addressed?


1. No.
2. If you disagree, vote.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#19 - 2012-08-03 02:08:42 UTC
JonnyRandom wrote:
If you had read the thread, you'd see that I am looking for two things:
1. Is this an issue that needs to be addressed?
2. How can this issue be addressed?


1. No

Why, because the issue as stated is manufactured from the misuse/misunderstanding of the statistical data and what it really means. The real issue, is game balance that encourages players to either remain in Highsec or have alts there to make risk free ISK.

2. Nerf Highsec income or nerf CONCORD/crimwatch


Now stop trolling us and go away.
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#20 - 2012-08-03 02:31:47 UTC
JonnyRandom wrote:
If you had read the thread, you'd see that I am looking for two things:
1. Is this an issue that needs to be addressed?
2. How can this issue be addressed?


#1 would be an issue if there was any kind of voting restrictions or problems that were preventing people from voting or running as a candidate. The only restriction to voting is that each account gets one vote, and that voting is only open for a set period, but this period is what, 14 days or something? Well past the point where anyone could say they totally would have voted but didn't have time. Running is similarly unrestricted, with the only requirement being that your account is older than 30 days and that you have a valid passport (as top 7 travel to Iceland). The barrier to become a votable candidate was also unbelievably low - 100 likes on the OP of your candidacy thread if my memory serves me.

Because #1 isn't an issue because of the outlined reasons, #2 is no longer a valid question.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
123Next pageLast page