These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Cookie Likes
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#21 - 2012-01-19 04:21:53 UTC
met worst wrote:
Ai Shun wrote:
met worst wrote:
Case in point.

What the CSM "expressed concerns" about versus CCP thinking LIKES is a legitimate culling tool.

I'm not for or against anyone or anything, I just feel that LIKES is a stupid way to represent the Eve playerbase (which is also an answer to drunken bum).

I care because I play Eve AND I vote.


My read of it was:


  1. CCP suggests support for CSM in JPSC.
  2. CCP mentions mechanisms, including posts, votes and likes.
  3. CSM backpedals on Likes
  4. Likes not mentioned, but CSM reaction recorded for minutes


Sounds like a typical meeting. Sounds like agreement Likes would be dumb. Sounds like it would be a different mechanism; but no matter what mechanism you use to validate the amount of support a particular CSM candidate has, large alliances with large voting blocks who can actually manage the man power can easily flood whatever mechanism is chosen.

It's the wording that suggests LIKES are THE method being suggested.

"...count the number of supports the post recieved..."

"....CSM also expressed concerns about using forum likes to poll support..."

"CCP responded that usage of the forum was extremely convenient and known to players, and that it would be difficult to develop a new method in the time available".

This is what I am trying to get across. How ELSE will they do it if it is not via LIKES "in the time available"?

I think that no matter what method is introduced you will be unhappy so long as large and well-organized voting blocs are able to snipe any opposition and guarantee their democratically elected or otherwise democratically chosen superiority.

PS: Snipe.

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
met worst
Doomheim
#22 - 2012-01-19 04:22:05 UTC
Morganta wrote:
posting in a "like jelly" thread

you just hate that anyone has more of anything than you do
just rename yourself Mr. 99%

lol Morgs. I bio'd a char with double your likes about 3 months ago.

That's how much I care about 'em. They're too susceptible to abuse and rather pointless in the scheme of things.
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#23 - 2012-01-19 04:23:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Lyris Nairn
met worst wrote:
Lyris Nairn wrote:
CCP institute some measure by which to prevent a person from adding likes to his total by use of alts. ......since it would present a more accurate picture of how much a particular poster is liked by the community.

You got it.

atm, system is easily abused ( in many cases obviously so ) and based on recent CSM minutes, suggestions are that CCP thinks the LIKE method is a valid one.

This just occurred to me—are you suggesting that people with a lot of likes, such as myself, are "obviously" abusing the system to get more likes by using alts? Now this sounds even more like jealousy than it did before I re-read your post. Straight

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
Spineker
#24 - 2012-01-19 04:23:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Spineker
6215 likes hahaha.

You need to have more of an opinion I think... just maybe

Maybe you have that many who knows who cares but seriously if you do.... Of course you are a Borg err I mean Goon.
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#25 - 2012-01-19 04:24:55 UTC
Spineker wrote:
6215 likes hahaha.

You need to have more of an opinion I think... just maybe

I've got pretty strong opinions on things, or at least I think so. Feel free to ask my opinion on things, I'll respond.

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
met worst
Doomheim
#26 - 2012-01-19 04:25:35 UTC
Lyris Nairn wrote:
met worst wrote:
Ai Shun wrote:
met worst wrote:
Case in point.

What the CSM "expressed concerns" about versus CCP thinking LIKES is a legitimate culling tool.

I'm not for or against anyone or anything, I just feel that LIKES is a stupid way to represent the Eve playerbase (which is also an answer to drunken bum).

I care because I play Eve AND I vote.


My read of it was:


  1. CCP suggests support for CSM in JPSC.
  2. CCP mentions mechanisms, including posts, votes and likes.
  3. CSM backpedals on Likes
  4. Likes not mentioned, but CSM reaction recorded for minutes


Sounds like a typical meeting. Sounds like agreement Likes would be dumb. Sounds like it would be a different mechanism; but no matter what mechanism you use to validate the amount of support a particular CSM candidate has, large alliances with large voting blocks who can actually manage the man power can easily flood whatever mechanism is chosen.

It's the wording that suggests LIKES are THE method being suggested.

"...count the number of supports the post recieved..."

"....CSM also expressed concerns about using forum likes to poll support..."

"CCP responded that usage of the forum was extremely convenient and known to players, and that it would be difficult to develop a new method in the time available".

This is what I am trying to get across. How ELSE will they do it if it is not via LIKES "in the time available"?

I think that no matter what method is introduced you will be unhappy so long as large and well-organized voting blocs are able to snipe any opposition and guarantee their democratically elected or otherwise democratically chosen superiority.

PS: Snipe.

Poor snipe 'cos you're plain wrong. Ppl can use whatever metagame techniques they like, they have to have support - that's voting/elections.

It's using LIKES to do so that is wrong. It's too easily abused.

I mean, reality check, how would they do it anyway? Reset LIKES and THEN count or start at some arbitrary time and count LIKES from that point.

Most unusual for you to miss the context.
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#27 - 2012-01-19 04:25:42 UTC
met worst wrote:
Morganta wrote:
posting in a "like jelly" thread

you just hate that anyone has more of anything than you do
just rename yourself Mr. 99%

lol Morgs. I bio'd a char with double your likes about 3 months ago.

That's how much I care about 'em. They're too susceptible to abuse and rather pointless in the scheme of things.

You care so little about them that you made a thread about them to tell us how terrible they are.

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
Spineker
#28 - 2012-01-19 04:25:55 UTC
Lyris Nairn wrote:
Spineker wrote:
6215 likes hahaha.

You need to have more of an opinion I think... just maybe

I've got pretty strong opinions on things, or at least I think so. Feel free to ask my opinion on things, I'll respond.



It is all good I was just like wow. Everyone loves you I guess.
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#29 - 2012-01-19 04:27:13 UTC
met worst wrote:
Lyris Nairn wrote:
met worst wrote:
Ai Shun wrote:
met worst wrote:
Case in point.

What the CSM "expressed concerns" about versus CCP thinking LIKES is a legitimate culling tool.

I'm not for or against anyone or anything, I just feel that LIKES is a stupid way to represent the Eve playerbase (which is also an answer to drunken bum).

I care because I play Eve AND I vote.


My read of it was:


  1. CCP suggests support for CSM in JPSC.
  2. CCP mentions mechanisms, including posts, votes and likes.
  3. CSM backpedals on Likes
  4. Likes not mentioned, but CSM reaction recorded for minutes


Sounds like a typical meeting. Sounds like agreement Likes would be dumb. Sounds like it would be a different mechanism; but no matter what mechanism you use to validate the amount of support a particular CSM candidate has, large alliances with large voting blocks who can actually manage the man power can easily flood whatever mechanism is chosen.

It's the wording that suggests LIKES are THE method being suggested.

"...count the number of supports the post recieved..."

"....CSM also expressed concerns about using forum likes to poll support..."

"CCP responded that usage of the forum was extremely convenient and known to players, and that it would be difficult to develop a new method in the time available".

This is what I am trying to get across. How ELSE will they do it if it is not via LIKES "in the time available"?

I think that no matter what method is introduced you will be unhappy so long as large and well-organized voting blocs are able to snipe any opposition and guarantee their democratically elected or otherwise democratically chosen superiority.

PS: Snipe.

Poor snipe 'cos you're plain wrong. Ppl can use whatever metagame techniques they like, they have to have support - that's voting/elections.

It's using LIKES to do so that is wrong. It's too easily abused.

I mean, reality check, how would they do it anyway? Reset LIKES and THEN count or start at some arbitrary time and count LIKES from that point.

Most unusual for you to miss the context.

Whether they use likes or per-account one-time votes (as with the CSM), or even per-IP address one-time votes, the results will be fairly congruent: people from within highly organized and well structured blocs will get much greater relative support, compared to people from without those same highly organized and well structured blocs.

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
Spineker
#30 - 2012-01-19 04:27:17 UTC
If there was dislikes I might be negative... haha
met worst
Doomheim
#31 - 2012-01-19 04:27:46 UTC
Lyris Nairn wrote:
met worst wrote:
Lyris Nairn wrote:
CCP institute some measure by which to prevent a person from adding likes to his total by use of alts. ......since it would present a more accurate picture of how much a particular poster is liked by the community.

You got it.

atm, system is easily abused ( in many cases obviously so ) and based on recent CSM minutes, suggestions are that CCP thinks the LIKE method is a valid one.

This just occurred to me—are you suggesting that people with a lot of likes, such as myself, are "obviously" abusing the system to get more likes by using alts? Now this sounds even more like jealousy than it did before I re-read your post. Straight

Lol. You think THAT's what this is about?

Again - get off the drugs. You're dropping the ball here.
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#32 - 2012-01-19 04:28:05 UTC
Spineker wrote:
Lyris Nairn wrote:
Spineker wrote:
6215 likes hahaha.

You need to have more of an opinion I think... just maybe

I've got pretty strong opinions on things, or at least I think so. Feel free to ask my opinion on things, I'll respond.



It is all good I was just like wow. Everyone loves you I guess.

It's mostly that I post a lot, and that I occasionally say something that people like. Smile

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#33 - 2012-01-19 04:28:40 UTC
Spineker wrote:
If there was dislikes I might be negative... haha

If there were dislikes I would be in the negative so far it's not even funny.

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#34 - 2012-01-19 04:29:26 UTC
met worst wrote:
Lyris Nairn wrote:
met worst wrote:
Lyris Nairn wrote:
CCP institute some measure by which to prevent a person from adding likes to his total by use of alts. ......since it would present a more accurate picture of how much a particular poster is liked by the community.

You got it.

atm, system is easily abused ( in many cases obviously so ) and based on recent CSM minutes, suggestions are that CCP thinks the LIKE method is a valid one.

This just occurred to me—are you suggesting that people with a lot of likes, such as myself, are "obviously" abusing the system to get more likes by using alts? Now this sounds even more like jealousy than it did before I re-read your post. Straight

Lol. You think THAT's what this is about?

Again - get off the drugs. You're dropping the ball here.

You're going to have to break it down for me then. How about we treat this like an academic paper, and you start with primitive terms from which you then build concepts and make assertions? We could even host a Lincoln-Douglas debate.

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
met worst
Doomheim
#35 - 2012-01-19 04:29:34 UTC
Lyris Nairn wrote:
met worst wrote:
Morganta wrote:
posting in a "like jelly" thread

you just hate that anyone has more of anything than you do
just rename yourself Mr. 99%

lol Morgs. I bio'd a char with double your likes about 3 months ago.

That's how much I care about 'em. They're too susceptible to abuse and rather pointless in the scheme of things.

You care so little about them that you made a thread about them to tell us how terrible they are.

Errr. 100% correct.

That's WHY I care little - they're terrible. Curious on views. Posted accordingly.

Problem?
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#36 - 2012-01-19 04:30:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Lyris Nairn
met worst wrote:
Lyris Nairn wrote:
met worst wrote:
Morganta wrote:
posting in a "like jelly" thread

you just hate that anyone has more of anything than you do
just rename yourself Mr. 99%

lol Morgs. I bio'd a char with double your likes about 3 months ago.

That's how much I care about 'em. They're too susceptible to abuse and rather pointless in the scheme of things.

You care so little about them that you made a thread about them to tell us how terrible they are.

Errr. 100% correct.

That's WHY I care little - they're terrible. Curious on views. Posted accordingly.

Problem?

People, especially on the Internet, tend to equate posting about a thing with caring a great deal about it.

e: I should say discussing or talking about a thing, since I mentioned "especially on the Interent," because people don't often post about things outside of the Internet. Oops

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
met worst
Doomheim
#37 - 2012-01-19 04:36:16 UTC
Lyris Nairn wrote:

Eh, I can see your point but this honestly to me seems like something pretty insubstantial and irrelevant; but, I am just a lowly and unimportant sky captain whom a few people happen to like feverishly and at every opportunity.

Ordinarily it would be insubstantial and irrelevant but NOT if it is to form the consenus for CSM candidates - and I say that regardless of who they are or what they intend to represent.

You know my anti-Goon stance (you're all a mob of pricks) but even if Chribba or the Raiden CEO got up as a candidate based on LIKES, I'd refuse to bother voting for them too.
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#38 - 2012-01-19 04:42:53 UTC
I had no idea about your anti-Goon stance but hey now there is no reason to be mean and call people names.

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
Spineker
#39 - 2012-01-19 04:44:54 UTC
CSM's are useless they do not represent anything never have. A joke on the players of Eve.

I voted Eve best game of the year because they changed their path not because of some useless thing called CSM.
Spineker
#40 - 2012-01-19 04:46:21 UTC
To even think they are there to support the player base is the biggest joke in gaming history.
Previous page123Next page