These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Call For Discussion : CSM Voting Reform

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#201 - 2012-09-08 18:54:30 UTC
Remnant Madeveda wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Remnant Madeveda wrote:
Depends, I mean Mittani already said he wouldn't cover or comment on anything the CSM said or did to remain professional, so no themittani.com article on it. However, it will remain at the top of the park for quite a while so long as we keep discussing it, and it will come to the attention of people that just browse for evenews anywhere. I wouldn't count on Riverini covering this on "EN-24", so we can't count on that exposure either. Ah well, at least we were able to let our displeasure with the proposal known.

I would imagine before the people come in (near voting season) the thread would be long dead, and anyone who tries to bring it up will find it locked for "necro".

As long as we never not post and keep it up, perhaps not, but there's months to go for us to get tired.

There are rules about that though...

Perfect, so it'll be long "discussed" "settled" and "approved" in time to maximize their voters' potential. Excellent.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Remnant Madeveda
Apex Mining and Industry
Caldari Alliance
#202 - 2012-09-08 18:58:33 UTC
I'm assuming they will at least have to exlpain how they want this system to work. That thread will also go for a fair few pages if they decide to go with this model. So in short, there will be exposure, even if we have to figure out creative ways to make it happen. The problem will of course be the TL:DR groups, but meh I assume most of them wont vote anyways.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#203 - 2012-09-08 19:13:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Remnant Madeveda wrote:
I'm assuming they will at least have to exlpain how they want this system to work. That thread will also go for a fair few pages if they decide to go with this model. So in short, there will be exposure, even if we have to figure out creative ways to make it happen. The problem will of course be the TL:DR groups, but meh I assume most of them wont vote anyways.

Note that the whole discussion is framed already as " there are many election systems that are clearly better than the current one."

This should not be simply accepted as given. Of course having votes transfer means you can have an ideal situation where you split all your votes N ways, and have alternatives in a ring so you'll get the most number of people in.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Remnant Madeveda
Apex Mining and Industry
Caldari Alliance
#204 - 2012-09-08 19:18:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Remnant Madeveda
Given that in Eve the meta-game is as important or moreso than the game itself it seems silly to believe the current system is flawed at all. If you really consider what goes on and how much time is put into the work of gaining recognition as a competant individual then you see these people, generally, deserve to be on CSM if they are elected. With that being said after losing a member of their team the current CSM appears to have lost an extra bit of guidance that would potentially allow them to be more cohesive, competant, and perhaps effective as a team.

So, my contention is leave the system as it is, and attempt to educate the playerbase you are so concerned with being underrepresented. If they are concerned about it at all, and it's not just sockpuppet arguements, then they will get people on CSM. I mean they keep saying that highsec is where most of the game is, if that's the case then it clearly should be able to dominate any election. Jesus, you'd think someone might realize that and make a voting system based on each person who cares having an opinion and using it to elect an official without any extra bullshit. You know a true democracy..oh wait...

This is a simple form of democracy, it does not need to be ******* rocket science.
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
#205 - 2012-09-08 19:22:52 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

I asked why they felt it targeted the CFC in particular and not "whichever group in the game has the most organized power". In other words, if your worst nightmare came true and Kelduum metagamed EVE University into the largest, most organized player entity in the game, how would Trebor's proposal treat EVE Uni any different than the CFC?

Why is disenfranchising a large portion of ANY organized voting bloc, whether it's Eve-U, the CFC, the HBC, or some future, not-yet-created bloc, okay. Answer that, it's the question you've been dancing around the whole ****ing thread.

This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

fofofo
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#206 - 2012-09-08 19:27:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
corestwo wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

I asked why they felt it targeted the CFC in particular and not "whichever group in the game has the most organized power". In other words, if your worst nightmare came true and Kelduum metagamed EVE University into the largest, most organized player entity in the game, how would Trebor's proposal treat EVE Uni any different than the CFC?

Why is disenfranchising a large portion of ANY organized voting bloc, whether it's Eve-U, the CFC, the HBC, or some future, not-yet-created bloc, okay. Answer that, it's the question you've been dancing around the whole ****ing thread.

Because people working together is bad.

This is EVE, where "group mining" is a multiboxed fleet.


I should add, having friends is bad (sea of blues), and having friends who like to undock together is even worse (blob!).

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#207 - 2012-09-08 19:31:25 UTC
corestwo wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

I asked why they felt it targeted the CFC in particular and not "whichever group in the game has the most organized power". In other words, if your worst nightmare came true and Kelduum metagamed EVE University into the largest, most organized player entity in the game, how would Trebor's proposal treat EVE Uni any different than the CFC?

Why is disenfranchising a large portion of ANY organized voting bloc, whether it's Eve-U, the CFC, the HBC, or some future, not-yet-created bloc, okay. Answer that, it's the question you've been dancing around the whole ****ing thread.


it's perfectly fine because our chosen candidate still gets in right?

I mean sure it makes only three fifths of the votes for the top guy relevant in this "candidate designated STV" but that's ~democracy~

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Brooson
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#208 - 2012-09-08 19:32:26 UTC
I want proof that this STV idea was discussed in previous CSM.

If not I am going to assume that we are being lied to by our current CSM.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#209 - 2012-09-08 19:32:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Andski wrote:
it's perfectly fine because our chosen candidate still gets in right?

I mean sure it makes only three fifths of the votes for the top guy relevant in this "candidate designated STV" but that's ~democracy~

Yeah, they gotta make sure "we" never get in otherwise we'll play the same game and then next time they'll get no one in.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Remnant Madeveda
Apex Mining and Industry
Caldari Alliance
#210 - 2012-09-08 19:34:23 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Andski wrote:
it's perfectly fine because our chosen candidate still gets in right?

I mean sure it makes only three fifths of the votes for the top guy relevant in this "candidate designated STV" but that's ~democracy~

Yeah, they gotta make sure "we" never get in otherwise we'll play the same game and then next time they'll get no one in.



I think everyone is forgetting two important variables, CFC and HBC bad at Eve.. good at politics.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#211 - 2012-09-08 19:41:10 UTC
Remnant Madeveda wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Andski wrote:
it's perfectly fine because our chosen candidate still gets in right?

I mean sure it makes only three fifths of the votes for the top guy relevant in this "candidate designated STV" but that's ~democracy~

Yeah, they gotta make sure "we" never get in otherwise we'll play the same game and then next time they'll get no one in.

I think everyone is forgetting two important variables, CFC and HBC bad at Eve.. good at politics.

Politics are so amusing sometimes.

You almost CAN'T get blueballed in Forums Online.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Remnant Madeveda
Apex Mining and Industry
Caldari Alliance
#212 - 2012-09-08 19:43:03 UTC
Until we get banhammered or the thread gets locked.. but I suppose we would just make a new discussion thread then eh?
Sirane Elrek
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#213 - 2012-09-08 19:44:23 UTC
Brooson wrote:
I want proof that this STV idea was discussed in previous CSM.

It's not STV. Stop calling it STV.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#214 - 2012-09-08 19:48:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Sirane Elrek wrote:
Brooson wrote:
I want proof that this STV idea was discussed in previous CSM.

It's not STV. Stop calling it STV.

Let's call it candidate-driven vote trading - CDVT

Or better yet, Politicians Trading Your Votes - PTYV

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#215 - 2012-09-08 19:48:45 UTC
I have a question for Trebor et. al:

Why do you feel the need to focus on reforming the election process and how is your point about the BIG BAD VOTING BLOCKS valid?

Changes for the sake of changes would be the innocent assumption here but I can see how that is not the case.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#216 - 2012-09-08 19:53:02 UTC
Andski wrote:
I have a question for Trebor et. al:

Why do you feel the need to focus on reforming the election process and how is your point about the BIG BAD VOTING BLOCKS valid?

Changes for the sake of changes would be the innocent assumption here but I can see how that is not the case.

I also want to know if it's indeed "et al".

There's been some evasion about how much consensus there is that this system should be stealth-introduced before people are paying attention to Jita Park.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
serras bang
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#217 - 2012-09-08 20:05:57 UTC  |  Edited by: serras bang
Two step wrote:
The issue I have with STV is that making voting *harder* isn't going to increase voter turnout numbers. Certainly the system Trebor proposed has some downsides, but one thing it does get right is that the voters wouldn't have to expend much more effort.

As someone who was elected from a smallish community, my worry is that in the future there might be 4 or 5 wormhole dudes running, and I don't want to see that mean that nobody from w-space gets elected. Avoiding that sort of scenario is my #1 requirement for a new voting system. My other desired features:

2) Encourage a broad representation on the CSM. Having a FW guy, or a wormhole guy, or a highsec guy on the CSM is really useful when we need a POV on issues that pertain to those communities.
3) Make voting easier, or at least as easy as it is currently.

How about this for an alternate proposal:

Run the election like true STV, but people pick a candidate and that candiate's list becomes their STV vote. It would also be nice to support people picking their own STV vote list, but that would take more dev time on CCP's part.


i like this guy he gets what the voters want.

also as i said before i think the csm has to be draged kicking and screaming into everyones mind that playes the game to get a true majority of the game voting.

however everyone should pick 3 candidates and the votes should never be in the candidates hands as that promots fixing if none of the 3 voted for guys make it the voter vote dosent get counted.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#218 - 2012-09-08 20:12:35 UTC
serras bang wrote:
i like this guy he gets what the voters want.

also as i said before i think the csm has to be draged kicking and screaming into everyones mind that playes the game to get a true majority of the game voting.

however everyone should pick 3 candidates and the votes should never be in the candidates hands as that promots fixing if none of the 3 voted for guys make it the voter vote dosent get counted.

So you have to force the voters into things, that's what the voters want?

Nice.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#219 - 2012-09-08 20:20:19 UTC
serras bang wrote:
however everyone should pick 3 candidates and the votes should never be in the candidates hands as that promots fixing if none of the 3 voted for guys make it the voter vote dosent get counted.

You make absolutely no sense.

Everyone should pick 3 candidates, but the candidates should be unable to tell people who to vote for, and none of the 3 guys people vote for doesn't get counted?

I've literally no idea what the **** you're trying to get at, I can't deparse it.

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

RIP Vile Rat
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#220 - 2012-09-08 20:27:31 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
serras bang wrote:
however everyone should pick 3 candidates and the votes should never be in the candidates hands as that promots fixing if none of the 3 voted for guys make it the voter vote dosent get counted.

You make absolutely no sense.

Everyone should pick 3 candidates, but the candidates should be unable to tell people who to vote for, and none of the 3 guys people vote for doesn't get counted?

I've literally no idea what the **** you're trying to get at, I can't deparse it.

He means the VOTERS should choose alternates, not have candidates themselves do it.

For example if a bunch of candidates choose one another.. but they're all too small all the votes go poof.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?