These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

NULL whiners mantra is getting tedious... and CSM lacks HI SEC representation

First post First post
Author
Frying Doom
#501 - 2012-09-03 14:05:29 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
1/6 is a bad level of engagement

Says who?

mathematics.

Wrong. Try again.

1/6 is below 3/6 which is half.

And any minority deciding things for a majority is not democratic.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#502 - 2012-09-03 14:09:18 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
1/6 is below 3/6 which is half.
…and that still doesn't make it bad engagement.
Frying Doom
#503 - 2012-09-03 14:12:35 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
1/6 is below 3/6 which is half.
…and that still doesn't make it bad engagement.

even if it were, which it isn't, there is still a lot of room for improvement.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#504 - 2012-09-03 14:13:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Brooks Puuntai
Some US midterm/presidential elections only get alittle bit above 1/3 of the total vote, and most elections hit about 1/2 of the total eligible voting population. So hitting 1/6 on a internet space ship game isn't bad really.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden

Hypercake Mix
#505 - 2012-09-03 14:13:53 UTC
Changes to high-sec affect other secs rather strongly with the way things are now. I would not risk putting someone in a CSM seat if they didn't have strong experience in all space. It's just unfortunate that the many that do have experience in all space are biased.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#506 - 2012-09-03 14:14:44 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
even if it were, which it isn't, even though it is there is still a lot of room for improvement.
…and annoying people is not the right way of doing it, nor should you really expect the numbers to be that much higher — hell, you shouldn't even expect them to be as high as ⅙ to begin with.
Frying Doom
#507 - 2012-09-03 14:23:40 UTC
Tippia wrote:
…and annoying people is not the right way of doing it, nor should you really expect the numbers to be that much higher — hell, you shouldn't even expect them to be as high as ⅙ to begin with.

As I have said before 1 minute a year is not very annoying.

For a player representative body with seats going to people with as little as 1/3 of 1% and the higest number of votes going to someone with 3% that is not a player representative council, it is a minority council.

The fact that there is 1/6 of the players involved in the process is a start but that's about it. It's a start. More can and should be done to promote the CSM to the players.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#508 - 2012-09-03 14:24:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Inquisitor Kitchner
I still love the fact this is going on, and the argument seems to be:

1) There are 50% more high sec players as null sec players
2) There isn't enough high sec representation on the democratically elected CSM


??????


Go vote? I took a degree in politics, I've studying UK, European and American politics for about 5 years. I can argue with you till 2 in the morning about how you're basically complaining about something which is perfectly natural.

The minorities that are represented were elected because their players (voters) engage with the game. High Sec players by and large don't, because they tend to want the game to be their game and no-one else's. There are plenty of Null/Low Sec players who do that too, and I disagree with them, but they actually care enough to vote.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli

Frying Doom
#509 - 2012-09-03 14:25:38 UTC
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
Some US midterm/presidential elections only get alittle bit above 1/3 of the total vote, and most elections hit about 1/2 of the total eligible voting population. So hitting 1/6 on a internet space ship game isn't bad really.

No it isn't really bad its a good start and much like US elections there should be more information given to the voters to encourage them to vote.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#510 - 2012-09-03 14:28:25 UTC
What exactly is missing in the current crop of CSM candidates? You've got a representative who ran on a mining platform, for Christ's sake. IIRC there was also someone running on a ******* "API" platform.

I'm guessing what you really want is more carebear representatives.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.

Frying Doom
#511 - 2012-09-03 14:28:45 UTC
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:


I still love the fact this is going on, and the argument seems to be:

1) There are 3 times as many high sec players as null sec players
2) There isn't enough high sec representation on the democratically elected CSM


??????


Go vote? I took a degree in politics, I've studying UK, European and American politics for about 5 years. I can argue with you till 2 in the morning about how you're basically complaining about something which is perfectly natural.

The minorities that are represented were elected because their players (voters) engage with the game. High Sec players by and large don't, because they tend to want the game to be their game and no-one else's. There are plenty of Null/Low Sec players who do that too, and I disagree with them, but they actually care enough to vote.

And with your studies in politics did governments, individual parties or candidate try to get more people to vote via advertising, scare campaigns or just meet and greets?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Frying Doom
#512 - 2012-09-03 14:30:15 UTC
Karl Hobb wrote:
What exactly is missing in the current crop of CSM candidates? You've got a representative who ran on a mining platform, for Christ's sake. IIRC there was also someone running on a ******* "API" platform.

I'm guessing what you really want is more carebear representatives.

The only thing missing is the majority of players voting.

Personally I find this years CSM the best we have ever had as far as what I consider to be representing EvE but that is the problem it is only my opinion and that of minorities.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#513 - 2012-09-03 14:32:03 UTC
Now this isn't the first time darth has said flat out false things, but come on... thinking the entirety of the csm represents only nullsec interests? That's just stupid.

And hey, if hisec makes up two thirds of the players... why not use your massive numbers to vote in hisec reps? Oh wait hiseccers are terrible and useless at every aspect of this game, thats why.
Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#514 - 2012-09-03 14:35:13 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
The only thing missing is the majority of players voting.

Why?

You'd have to be either a complete numbskull or just plain apathetic to not vote for the CSM, and I don't want numbskulls or the apathetic to vote.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.

Frying Doom
#515 - 2012-09-03 14:38:36 UTC
Karl Hobb wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
The only thing missing is the majority of players voting.

Why?

You'd have to be either a complete numbskull or just plain apathetic to not vote for the CSM, and I don't want numbskulls or the apathetic to vote.

If democracy has shown anything its that numbskulls need to vote too. This is a game and it is just as much theirs as it is ours. They obviously need educating otherwise they would vote. Every democratic organization in the world attempts to encourage people to vote and have their say. Why should we be any different?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#516 - 2012-09-03 14:40:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Corina Jarr
How do you plan on getting the majority of players to vote if they won't now?

CSM members already advertise everywhere, including EVE mail.


OO, I know I know. CCP hires anonymous folks to go over people's houses and threaten them with death if they don't vote.


Cause that is about all CCP hasn't tried.
Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#517 - 2012-09-03 14:43:15 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
If democracy has shown anything its that numbskulls need to vote too.

No, actually, it hasn't shown anything of the sort; quite the opposite, in fact.

Frying Doom wrote:
This is a game and it is just as much theirs as it is ours. They obviously need educating otherwise they would vote. Every democratic organization in the world attempts to encourage people to vote and have their say. Why should we be any different?

So you basically want the willfully ignorant or completely stupid to be forced to vote?

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.

Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#518 - 2012-09-03 14:44:03 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
How do you plan on getting the majority of players to vote if they won't now?

CSM members already advertise everywhere, including EVE mail.

He wants CCP to do MOAR WERK.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#519 - 2012-09-03 14:48:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Zim
betoli wrote:
Thats a campaigning issue. If a candidate only stood for reduced clicks, that would make them a **** poor candidate. But the same argument can be made against the current system - there is nothing stopping the current CSM focussing on their own personal irrelevance. What the suggestion would mean is that there would be some explicit lobby for indy (whether or not its useful is an issue for voters)

So, what was wrong with the current current CSM? Last I checked, it did have a candidate to take care of, well, hisec basically. Must there be more hisec/indy/whatever representatives?

betoli wrote:
No I doubt that. Well unless a complete idiot was elected - which i guess is possible. One of the problems on the forums is that nullers et al make the assumption that highseccers just want more reward and less risk. In fact most recognise IMHO that balance is really important.

I think you're putting too much faith in the hands of those who tend to categorize themselves as belonging to hisec, or who just call themselves industrialists.

Go ahead, ask any of them if they would contemplate any nerfs at all to hisec to make low/nullsec more vibrant. Keep in mind that every time CCP has tried to make nullsec more vibrant (like when they added anoms), they've had to nerf them a few months later, and they've piled nerf upon nerf upon nerf on nullsec the past few years.

betoli wrote:
TBH what I think your doing here is portraying a potential 'mission runner' rep as the worst of the forums carebear whiners - its a sort of generalised ad-hominem attack. Whilst forgetting that a lot of people run mission-alts to fund PVP and other game activity.

No, I'm not "forgetting" that a lot of people run mission alts to fund PVP and other game activities, in fact my argument lies squarely at the fact that a lot of people are running mission alts in hisec to fund their nullsec habit, instead of doing this in nullsec. This should indicate to anyone that hisec is too profitable in comparison to nullsec, and the way the anoms were nerfed after a few months also indicates that any rewards can't really go up too much more than they already are at, today, without there becoming serious game-breaking issues with them. I.e. L4s have set the bar too high for rewards.

betoli wrote:
Are you serious? Missions... should require PVP fits not dedicated PVE fits so that people actually learn how to play. Mission AI? ? Boringness? Its only if your perspective is that missions are an intentional painful grind to make isk, that missions don't need love.

All decisions are up to CCP. All we are talking about is representation to that dictatorship. But CCP does worry and count how much time is spent doing what - thats their food supply. And it should be a guide - I am not saying that 60% of the CSM should be HS orientated, because that would be foolish - but it could be improved from what we have now - short answer - its up to CCP.

So when it comes to everything that's broken in eve, the only thing you can think of offhand that's broken is missions not requiring PVP fits?

As to how much of the CSM should be HS oriented, how many would it take, then? You have one representative which you guys've gotten in on it, which at least has claimed was going to work for a better hisec, how many more do you need?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#520 - 2012-09-03 14:52:01 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Tippia wrote:
…and annoying people is not the right way of doing it, nor should you really expect the numbers to be that much higher — hell, you shouldn't even expect them to be as high as ⅙ to begin with.

As I have said before 1 minute a year is not very annoying.

It won't have the effect you're looking for. My prediction is that the only thing a vast majority of people will do is press abstain, and then those who actually cares about voting will go to eve gate to vote there instead at a time of their choosing. When they're logging in, they're logging in to play. They're not logging in to be nagged at by some voting thing.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat