EVE Information Portal

For CSM9 can we see the return of the abstain option? Just for statistical purposes?

Considering I voted for you on 4 accounts (varying slot, somewhere between 2 and 7), I have somewhat of an idea how you might have picked up some votes...

Well you can always take out the second part of your sentence & force them to vote thru compulsory sufferage. It wouldn't in any way guarenty representation but it could give CCP a better idea of player preferences after the random noise is filtered out.



There are many countries where you don't have a right to not vote. I doubt making CSM9 voting like agreeing to the EULA would be that dificult & while sure people will say they are rage quitting over it I doub they really would & hopefully more peeps would look at the candidates then crawling under thier rock. Plus imagine all the botters frustartions at having to fill out all the ballots ( I guess the BM trick though would make voing not too time consuming though )

That and people playing skill training offline for the voting period or letting their sub. lapse, and I'm sure CCP wants all these things.

*Sigh*

Casual gameplay is gameplay for casual players. Casual players are those with less playtime and more sporadic playtime. A casual player can be someone who undocks for 30 minutes to hotdrop in nullsec just as much as someone who undocks for 30 minutes to shoot space rocks two jumps from Jita. Their concerns are effectively the same: access to engaging play that doesn't require a huge commitment of time.

Casual players exist in every security space, and they all deserve to have their concerns addressed as long as CCP continues to court them as customers, which I believe they do.

The idea that people who want to multibox afk mine with 20 accounts in perfect safety for hours on end speak for "casual players" is a farce that has been perpetrated for at least the half decade that I've been playing, perhaps since the early days of the game. It is a false confluence of the worst sort, and the reason actual casual hisec players have effectively no consistent and cohesive representation. Fortunately for nullsec players, the CFC votes represent solid votes for protecting the interests of casual nullsec players, though that isn't to disparage members from other blocs, just that they represent less of a "sure bet" in that regard; I can't speak to WHs or Lowsec.

That's the second time I've heard someone use that same line, and it makes as little sense the second time.

Are people trying to imply there's some statistical method for controlling for random voting in compulsory elections? Because that would defy my, admittedly sophomoric, education in statistics, as well as what I would consider common sense.

At the very least I would like to see some elaboration and references to actual people who know wtf they're talking about wrt to statistics before I accept that such a technique or process exists anywhere but the fevered imaginings of this forum's more special denizens.

Other than the defining feature that dictates almost all of their game experience, what do they have in common? A banal question. They don't need anything more in common.



No, you're trying to conflate income and game time again. You can make billions updating orders once a day in Jita, or you can fly for free in perpetuity in nullsec if you can make a 2 hour strat op once or twice a month.

The defining and common feature of casual players is their gametime. They don't need to share anything else because that is the most determining feature of their game experience. Whatever they are doing with that time, the amount of time they have to do it will dictate the experience. Different areas of space have different game mechanics that shape the gameplay within them, but casual players from all security space share the same formative restriction in how they interact with the available gameplay in every security space.

Casual hisec players should identify as casual hisec players first, casual players second, and lastly, if at all as "hisec players" (though that term is ultimately meaningless in my mind). As long as they let themselves be conflated with those advocating massive wealth generation as the purpose of hisec, which always favors those who are anything but casual, then they will continue to to receive nothing that actually suits them as players.

CCP already speaks in this language by using terms like "enablers" and so on, instead of broad and ill-fitting security area classifications, and drives their development according to that schema. It is time for casual hisec players to start speaking the same language about themselves.

Random noise is donkey votes: they'll be counted but won't significantly wiegh on any trends.

Ranom noise/donkey votes won't hurt any candidate, giving peeps that extra push might make a few ( or many considering the extremely low turnout we currently have ) to actually think about the votes they cast.

"Again" as in you're returning to a point that I've already discussed, forcing me to repeat myself.



Another banal question. They want Eve appropriate gameplay (define that for yourself) that fits into their schedules.