These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#961 - 2012-11-21 08:33:43 UTC
So to which extent is this "loophole" being "exploited"?

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

RIP Vile Rat
Frying Doom
#962 - 2012-11-21 08:37:27 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Yes there is look, look at the amount of action taken to prevent this type of behavior occurring and that will pretty much tell you how big the loop hole is.

For example if Goonswarm wanted to seal up the next election, thanks to the tech welfare system your accounts stand at around 1.5 trillion.

So if you where to save from now to the elections you would have sufficient funds to cover all ongoing actions and still pay for 2500 votes enough to elect 2 people to the CSM without your active members even voting.

I am not saying you would do this or any more than a few thousand were done in total but it is a loop hole and it needs to be made harder but of course you disagree. For what reason I wonder, if not to protect this loop hole?


Dammit, I thought we were making progress. Oh well.

Snow Axe wrote:
Cite the actual numbers of new voting accounts (aka prove yourself right) or shut the **** up..

The numbers for previous elections are availble if you just search for them, I do not work for CCP customer service, so give reasons for this loophole not to be closed or move along.

As no one other than us will ever actually read this (It's in Jita Park), I do honestly hope they fix Null, it would be nice to have a reason to go there. I give you guys crap on the 20% but tbh that is because that is really what the CSM should be doing to get people more emotionally attached to the space you dwell in but anyway.

Close the loop hole.Lol

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#963 - 2012-11-21 08:38:15 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
So to which extent is this "loophole" being "exploited"?

Anything more than 0% is to much in an election of any nature.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#964 - 2012-11-21 08:39:30 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
So to which extent is this "loophole" being "exploited"?

Anything more than 0% is to much in an election of any nature.

So to which extent is this "loophole" being "exploited"?

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

RIP Vile Rat
Frying Doom
#965 - 2012-11-21 08:40:29 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
So to which extent is this "loophole" being "exploited"?

Anything more than 0% is to much in an election of any nature.

So to which extent is this "loophole" being "exploited"?

do you mean to which extent or to what extent?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#966 - 2012-11-21 08:43:34 UTC
I'm going to just take that as "I don't know how much it is exploited, if at all, but I'm going to arrghlebarrghle about it anyways".

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

RIP Vile Rat
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#967 - 2012-11-21 08:43:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
Frying Doom wrote:
The numbers for previous elections are availble if you just search for them, I do not work for CCP customer service, so give reasons for this loophole not to be closed or move along.


When I say "cite them", I don't just mean show the numbers. I mean point out how these numbers prove your claim to be true.

I've seen them, I know them. I want to know what numbers you're using and how you read them. This is a pretty simple request and we're going on 3 pages of you doing whatever you can to avoid doing that. This is all made even shadier by you saying that you've cited these "somewhere else", and yet refuse to find them (you'd know best where you said them, as opposed to us) and even just simply c/p or link.

So yeah, consider this put up or shut up time. Cite or **** off forever and stop poisoning the discourse of this forum with your babbling nonsense.

Lord Zim wrote:
I'm going to just take that as "I don't know how much it is exploited, if at all, but I'm going to arrghlebarrghle about it anyways".


He doesn't even know if anything is being exploited at all, or that an exploit even exists in the first place.

"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["
Frying Doom
#968 - 2012-11-21 08:49:28 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
I'm going to just take that as "I don't know how much it is exploited, if at all, but I'm going to arrghlebarrghle about it anyways".

Actually as new accounts have been in the top 3 sets of voters on the last 3 + elections I would say this behaviour has been going on for some years and the actual election resualts have been fixed since before CSM 5 to the tune of around 4-5000 votes.

So a hell of a lot of people creating new accounts only around voting time then the numbers seem to slip. Also there is a corresponding rise on the plex market at the same time.

Go have a look yourself.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#969 - 2012-11-21 08:51:12 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
The numbers for previous elections are availble if you just search for them, I do not work for CCP customer service, so give reasons for this loophole not to be closed or move along.


When I say "cite them", I don't just mean show the numbers. I mean point out how these numbers prove your claim to be true.

I've seen them, I know them. I want to know what numbers you're using and how you read them. This is a pretty simple request and we're going on 3 pages of you doing whatever you can to avoid doing that. This is all made even shadier by you saying that you've cited these "somewhere else", and yet refuse to find them (you'd know best where you said them, as opposed to us) and even just simply c/p or link.

So yeah, consider this put up or shut up time. Cite or **** off forever and stop poisoning the discourse of this forum with your babbling nonsense.

Lord Zim wrote:
I'm going to just take that as "I don't know how much it is exploited, if at all, but I'm going to arrghlebarrghle about it anyways".


He doesn't even know if anything is being exploited at all, or that an exploit even exists in the first place.

The numbers are here:
http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=886
http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=28529
http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=763

But I am sure you will tell me newbies vote as huge percentages and then leave the game.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#970 - 2012-11-21 08:53:19 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:


He doesn't even know if anything is being exploited at all, or that an exploit even exists in the first place.

Actually your actions pretty much show that you are aware of the loop hole and are protecting it.

As why would you fight to protect a loop hole that does not exist? That really would not make any sense.

But to be honest this will probably just be left like so much and the CSM will continue to be the Minority with the rest of EvE laughing at it.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#971 - 2012-11-21 08:58:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
Frying Doom wrote:
But I am sure you will tell me newbies vote as huge percentages and then leave the game.


The lowest bracket measured in ANY of those numbers is between 30-249 days, aka between 1 and 8 1/3 months. Unless you've got a more accurate breakdown of the votes within that category, you've still got nothing.

I could also point out that the percentage of this "young" category has dropped over 7% since CSM 5 (the last time the percentage of young accts was over 20%, and the all time high number of young accounts voting), but you'll probably just dismiss all of this as "defending the loophole", all the while dodging explaining your own interpretation (because it's bulllshit).

"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["
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#972 - 2012-11-21 09:01:25 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
The numbers are here:
http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=886
http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=28529
http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=763

But I am sure you will tell me newbies vote as huge percentages and then leave the game.

Who do these newbies vote for? Who owns them? How many of those are owned by people who own other accounts which are older than 1 month?

And most importantly, what needs to be done to solve this "problem"?

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

RIP Vile Rat
Frying Doom
#973 - 2012-11-21 09:04:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Snow Axe wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
But I am sure you will tell me newbies vote as huge percentages and then leave the game.


The lowest bracket measured in ANY of those numbers is between 30-249 days, aka between 1 and 8 1/3 months. Unless you've got a more accurate breakdown of the votes within that category, you've still got nothing.

I could also point out that the percentage of this "young" category has dropped over 7% since CSM 5 (the last time the percentage of young accts was over 20%), but you'll probably just dismiss all of this as "defending the loophole", all the while dodging explaining your own interpretation (because it's bulllshit).

So as the number of votes has increased across the board this number has remained effectively static, hmm almost like the same set of people are buying the same amount of accounts to vote each time.

Not that this really matters much, it's a loop hole, you know it, I know it

That and it might be a worth while argument if the CSM ever got to be more than a Null sec joke. We have so many others this year from Hi-sec, lo-sec and wormholes and their 3 propositions are 1 for POS'S and 2 for Null.

So yeah it is still a Null sec joke.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#974 - 2012-11-21 09:11:10 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
So as the number of votes has increased across the board this number has remained effectively static, hmm almost like the same set of people are buying the same amount of accounts to vote each time.


And yet the results of every election from CSM 1-5 have been drastically different. 6 and 7 weren't even all that similar, save for Mittani winning the chair both times (the first time anyone from Goonswarm or Goonwaffe had ever won the chair, and only the 3rd time that a Goon candidate had even broken the top 3, by the way), and they had the lowest young account turnout percentage by far.

You going to take another swing at this or...?

"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["
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#975 - 2012-11-21 09:15:22 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
So as the number of votes has increased across the board this number has remained effectively static, hmm almost like the same set of people are buying the same amount of accounts to vote each time.

So what you're saying is, you're looking at the numbers and going all "it must be a goon conspiracy to keep the common eve player down"?

Frying Doom wrote:
Not that this really matters much, it's a loop hole, you know it, I know it

Which part of this is a problem, and how do you solve it?

Frying Doom wrote:
That and it might be a worth while argument if the CSM ever got to be more than a Null sec joke. We have so many others this year from Hi-sec, lo-sec and wormholes and their 3 propositions are 1 for POS'S and 2 for Null.

So yeah it is still a Null sec joke.

What do you put into the phrase "a null sec joke"?

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

RIP Vile Rat
Frying Doom
#976 - 2012-11-21 09:20:36 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
So as the number of votes has increased across the board this number has remained effectively static, hmm almost like the same set of people are buying the same amount of accounts to vote each time.


And yet the results of every election from CSM 1-5 have been drastically different. 6 and 7 weren't even all that similar, save for Mittani winning the chair both times (the first time anyone from Goonswarm or Goonwaffe had ever won the chair, and only the 3rd time that a Goon candidate had even broken the top 3, by the way), and they had the lowest young account turnout percentage by far.

You going to take another swing at this or...?

CSM 5 8598 21.80%
CSM 6 7200 14.67%
CSM 7 8447 14.29%

As I said that is a lot of newbies casting votes, people also even mentioned they were doing this subsequently the comment from a DEV that they had to wait a day before voting when activating an account with plex, most of the people on those threads however were faceless alts. So yes it does exist it was even posted by people do so, personally it needs to be closed to make this harder to achieve but as I said it wont be.

CSM 1-4 were of little interest to anyone, except maybe goonswarms picking on an old ex-chairman.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#977 - 2012-11-21 09:26:01 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

So yeah it is still a Null sec joke.

What do you put into the phrase "a null sec joke"?

The CSM has been for the last few years especially, more a lobby group for Null sec than an actual player representative council.

Yes Null is a trashed wasteland but so few live there, effectively yes the CSM should have a long term road map including Null but the majority especially the work of CSM 6 (see notes on their work) was a road map of Null with some things shoe horned in for other areas, because of the exceptional work of individuals, not the CSM itself.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#978 - 2012-11-21 09:26:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
Frying Doom wrote:
CSM 5 8598 21.80%
CSM 6 7200 14.67%
CSM 7 8447 14.29%

As I said that is a lot of newbies casting votes, people also even mentioned they were doing this subsequently the comment from a DEV that they had to wait a day before voting when activating an account with plex, most of the people on those threads however were faceless alts. So yes it does exist it was even posted by people do so, personally it needs to be closed to make this harder to achieve but as I said it wont be.

CSM 1-4 were of little interest to anyone, except maybe goonswarms picking on an old ex-chairman.


Frying Doom wrote:
So as the number of votes has increased across the board this number has remained effectively static, hmm almost like the same set of people are buying the same amount of accounts to vote each time.
.


And yet, 5-6-7 all had quite drastic shifts in who actually won anything! Null was nonexistant in 5, dominant in 6 and 7's diverse as hell (and will be even more diverse now that the DRF doesn't exist and HBC is A Thing). Also, as I said before, until you've got a breakdown of that 30-249 day category, you've got no idea how old those accounts actually were.

The only thing you've proven so far is that you can't read stats for ****.

"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["
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#979 - 2012-11-21 09:29:02 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
The CSM has been for the last few years especially, more a lobby group for Null sec than an actual player representative council.

Yes Null is a trashed wasteland but so few live there, effectively yes the CSM should have a long term road map including Null but the majority especially the work of CSM 6 (see notes on their work) was a road map of Null with some things shoe horned in for other areas, because of the exceptional work of individuals, not the CSM itself.

You didn't explain what you put in the phrase "a null sec joke".

Also, you missed a spot:

Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
So as the number of votes has increased across the board this number has remained effectively static, hmm almost like the same set of people are buying the same amount of accounts to vote each time.

So what you're saying is, you're looking at the numbers and going all "it must be a goon conspiracy to keep the common eve player down"?

Frying Doom wrote:
Not that this really matters much, it's a loop hole, you know it, I know it

Which part of this is a problem, and how do you solve it?

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

RIP Vile Rat
Frying Doom
#980 - 2012-11-21 09:37:15 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
CSM 5 8598 21.80%
CSM 6 7200 14.67%
CSM 7 8447 14.29%

As I said that is a lot of newbies casting votes, people also even mentioned they were doing this subsequently the comment from a DEV that they had to wait a day before voting when activating an account with plex, most of the people on those threads however were faceless alts. So yes it does exist it was even posted by people do so, personally it needs to be closed to make this harder to achieve but as I said it wont be.

CSM 1-4 were of little interest to anyone, except maybe goonswarms picking on an old ex-chairman.


Frying Doom wrote:
So as the number of votes has increased across the board this number has remained effectively static, hmm almost like the same set of people are buying the same amount of accounts to vote each time.
.


And yet, 5-6-7 all had quite drastic shifts in who actually won anything! Null was nonexistant in 5, dominant in 6 and 7's diverse as hell (and will be even more diverse now that the DRF doesn't exist and HBC is A Thing). Also, as I said before, until you've got a breakdown of that 30-249 day category, you've got no idea how old those accounts actually were.

The only thing you've proven so far is that you can't read stats for ****.

So Veto Corp, Agony Unleashed, Pandemic Legion, Shadow Kingdom, Rooks and Kings or Triumvirate, none of these are Null sec groups? Funny I thought some where as they where all on CSM 5 Big smile

And yes CSM 6 and 7 have been diverse but given CSM6's primarily Null focus and now CSM 7 seeming to follow suite can you blame people for thinking the CSM is little more than a Null Lobby group and appart from Issler all that is really left of the CSM atm that is visible is Two Step, Trebor Daehdoow (sometimes), Seleene, Hans Jagerblitzen and Alekseyev Karrde. The rest seems to have vanished but with some of these people hogging the lime light or mic can you blame the rest.

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