These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CCP - make the call

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rico Minali
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2012-01-26 11:35:37 UTC
Look at all that support you got Met, clearly you are right. Oh wait..

Trust me, I almost know what I'm doing.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#42 - 2012-01-26 11:46:31 UTC
met worst wrote:
>> SAVE THE GAME - KILL THE CSM

Dump them. Sack them. Kiss 'em off.


Find a method that represents ALL players and let's not have another year of self-congratulatory BS served in ego-wrap.

Follow the path taken with Crucible, listen to the majority when they speak (i.e. Jita Riots) and refuse to acknowledge the self-servers who claimed credit for what YOU, CCP, ultimately did.

IGNORE the morons that did everything they could to BRING THE GAME INTO DISREPUTE with public "foot stamping" - the same people that pushed for game changes for the betterment of their own alliances. A MINORITY of EVE.

CSM 6 is corrupt, biased and downright dangerous for THE GAME.

WE DO NOT want a repeat.

CONSIDER random surveys from random players ad hoc to draw opinions/direction.


>> SAVE THE GAME - KILL THE CSM



70% of the CSM votes went to people who got elected. That's pretty damb representative.

People who didn't vote might not be represented so well, but that's not CCPs fault, still less the CSM's.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Lyrka Bloodberry
Spybeaver
#43 - 2012-01-26 11:48:50 UTC
Darius III wrote:
Players without a huge vote bloc that are in CSM are there because people take time to get to know their viewpoints/opinions on the issues.


Problem is: There aren't many members in the CSM without a huge vote bloc.

Interesting you picked Meissa Anunthiel for an example because of all the non-alternate members he seems (to me) to be the only one who was not elected just because of his huge block of alliance-voters.

Spybeaver
Niko Takahashi
Yoshitomi Group
#44 - 2012-01-26 11:50:34 UTC
Mara Tessidar wrote:
The existence of this thread and other threads like it justifies every effort Goonswarm has ever made to rule the CSM.


Nahh it just confirms you succeeding in being the new hated entity on Par with BOB.Big smile

Do not share the overall hate rage of the OP but I agree that some new mechanic of representing other more disorganized parts of the player base should be introduced.
Jafit McJafitson
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#45 - 2012-01-26 11:51:03 UTC
Darius III wrote:
Players without a huge vote bloc that are in CSM are there because people take time to get to know their viewpoints/opinions on the issues.


Ahahaaaaa, I see what you did there.
Shadowsword
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2012-01-26 11:51:11 UTC
Black Dranzer wrote:
Roosterton wrote:
And you're claiming that this isn't in the interests of the majority of the playerbase?

The problem is the assumption that the majority of the playerbase knows or understands who the CSM are or what they do. I'm not sure that it's safe to make that assumption. I'm not saying the CSM are bad, but the statement that they don't represent the majority of the playerbase is probably accurate if only because the majority of the playerbase probably don't even know they exist.


Are you suggesting that the voting population has opinions that significantly differ from those of the non-voting population, then?

If yes, you deny the (relative) accuracy of every opinion poll, IG or IRL. You deny the very principle of it.

If no, then there's no issue.
Rendaw
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#47 - 2012-01-26 12:42:58 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=886
Quote:
There were 49,096 votes cast by eligible voters (i.e. older than 30 days and thus able to vote), amassing a turnout of 14.25% - once again a record turnout. Of the total votes cast, 659 voters (1.34%) chose to abstain. This abstain % is far lower than previous elections, indicating that players had a better idea of who they wished to vote for compared to previous elections.


14.25% turnout. The winners received a total 27,580 votes, which means only 56.2% of 14.25% voted for them. Ergo, the CSM represents 8% of the player base.

*shrug*




stopped reading after this, just ended the whole 'does the csm represent the players' debate for me :)
Jafit McJafitson
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#48 - 2012-01-26 13:28:16 UTC
Rendaw wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=886
Quote:
There were 49,096 votes cast by eligible voters (i.e. older than 30 days and thus able to vote), amassing a turnout of 14.25% - once again a record turnout. Of the total votes cast, 659 voters (1.34%) chose to abstain. This abstain % is far lower than previous elections, indicating that players had a better idea of who they wished to vote for compared to previous elections.


14.25% turnout. The winners received a total 27,580 votes, which means only 56.2% of 14.25% voted for them. Ergo, the CSM represents 8% of the player base.

*shrug*




stopped reading after this, just ended the whole 'does the csm represent the players' debate for me :)


Not only do most players in this game not care about the game or the CSM enough to vote, but it seems there are a fair few who don't understand how democracy works.
MrWhitei God
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#49 - 2012-01-26 13:29:25 UTC
met worst wrote:
>> SAVE THE GAME - KILL THE CSM

Dump them. Sack them. Kiss 'em off.


Find a method that represents ALL players and let's not have another year of self-congratulatory BS served in ego-wrap.

Follow the path taken with Crucible, listen to the majority when they speak (i.e. Jita Riots) and refuse to acknowledge the self-servers who claimed credit for what YOU, CCP, ultimately did.

IGNORE the morons that did everything they could to BRING THE GAME INTO DISREPUTE with public "foot stamping" - the same people that pushed for game changes for the betterment of their own alliances. A MINORITY of EVE.

CSM 6 is corrupt, biased and downright dangerous for THE GAME.

WE DO NOT want a repeat.

CONSIDER random surveys from random players ad hoc to draw opinions/direction.


>> SAVE THE GAME - KILL THE CSM


when did you start posting like a moron?
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#50 - 2012-01-26 14:46:29 UTC
Lyrka Bloodberry wrote:
Darius III wrote:
Players without a huge vote bloc that are in CSM are there because people take time to get to know their viewpoints/opinions on the issues.


Problem is: There aren't many members in the CSM without a huge vote bloc.

Interesting you picked Meissa Anunthiel for an example because of all the non-alternate members he seems (to me) to be the only one who was not elected just because of his huge block of alliance-voters.


Yes, because Elise and Seleene got elected because of PL's huge voting bloc, all 400 real members of PL voted for them, obviously stacking the odds in their favor.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Taedrin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2012-01-26 14:58:37 UTC
Quote:
The third change proposed was changing the election system from the current form to a single transferrable vote (STV) (i.e. any surplus or unused votes are transferred according to the voter's stated preferences should their highest preference not need them or not make it in). The timeframe for this change would be the election in 2013 (thus, no changes would be made for the next CSM election).
In short, the CSM said that if STV would be implemented it would be heaven for the powerblocks and would basically allow them to dictate every single seat on the CSM. Also, with the current situation the only thing the STV would do is to potentially get a ‘smaller’ candidate into one of the lower seats. Furthermore, by making the voting system more complicated (as an STV would do) the risk of driving away voters exists. Continuing, the CSM commented that only with a substantially larger number of voters would the STV system be appropriate.


Source: CSM minutes

Looks like those terrible 0.0 overlords who seized the CSM last election are up to their old tricks again. NOW they want to consolidate their power by ... dismissing an idea which would allow them to take over the CSM entirely?
Samillian
Angry Mustellid
#52 - 2012-01-26 15:02:06 UTC
met worst wrote:
>> SCREW THE GAME - KILL THE CSM

Dump them. Sack them. Kiss 'em off.


Find a method that represents ALL my views and let's not have another year of some often SENSIBLE ideas served in ego-wrap.

Follow the path taken with Crucible, listen to IME, ME, ME when I speak (i.e. whining threads) and refuse to acknowledge the self-servers who claimed credit for what YOU (fawn, pander, slurpy, slurp) CCP, ultimately did.

IGNORE the morons (anyone with a different play style) that did everything they could to BRING THE GAME INTO BALANCE with public "foot stamping" - the same people that pushed for game changes and for the betterment of game mechanics and playability. A MAJORITY of EVE.

CSM 6 is corrupt, biased and downright dangerous for THE GAME THAT SHOULD BE PLAYED MY WAY ONLY.

WE DO NOT want a repeat OF POSTS LIKE THIS.

CONSIDER random surveys from random players ad hoc to draw opinions/direction since they can't be bothered to vote this is bound to work.


>> SAVE THE GAME - KILL ME


Translated for you.

NBSI shall be the whole of the Law
NaturalBeast
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#53 - 2012-01-26 15:03:24 UTC
I kinda like the CSM. The drama, the controversy, the forum rage.

Elise is a good guy, didn't know him much with his short stay in SOT but he loved to PVP, always a plus. Seelene has a good command of the game and knows how to command respect. Maybe between the two of them they can teach CCP fleet how to equip their damn ships.

Frankly its a great way to communicate with the game. CCP should be promoting it more outside of game so people will understand how deep the rabbit hole is in this game.

I would pay to see the OP 1v1 any of the CSM members.



met worst
Doomheim
#54 - 2012-01-26 20:56:11 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=886
Quote:
There were 49,096 votes cast by eligible voters (i.e. older than 30 days and thus able to vote), amassing a turnout of 14.25% - once again a record turnout. Of the total votes cast, 659 voters (1.34%) chose to abstain. This abstain % is far lower than previous elections, indicating that players had a better idea of who they wished to vote for compared to previous elections.


14.25% turnout. The winners received a total 27,580 votes, which means only 56.2% of 14.25% voted for them. Ergo, the CSM represents 8% of the player base.

*shrug*


Which is my point in a nutshell and leaves the question WHY most Eve players cannot be bothered to vote.

Neither the voting NOR the constituents of the CSM are a representative of the majority of the player base. The "election" is a small pocket of SOME of the Eve players who talk up it's importance for their own benefit.

I will not stand, "like" any candidate nor vote because IMO the system is seriously flawed and based on voting numbers - I cannot be alone in this.

Far better to have no system than a bad system and is quite probably why people DO NOT VOTE. Apathy might be the reason offered but absolute lack of interest either proves disgust at the system/CSM/BS OR points out the irrelevance of the CSM to the majority.

.o0o.

Perhaps a pie style electorate is an option? (I'm not a political expert so concept is up for grabs.)

9 segments in total, with a snapshot at random, and the segment you fall in at the time of the snapshot is your electorate.

Candidates can then rise by a "normal" selection scrum. 2 or 3 come from the selection process but only 1 per pie slice can be voted in.

I don't know what will work. As stated, I don't have the answers but the current system is NOT something I am even remotely interested in being represented by and it concerns me.

Voter apathy must be because of similiar concerns. If not, what is it?
Dbars Grinding
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#55 - 2012-01-26 21:04:54 UTC
can we rename the CSM to SMUG?

S pace
M asterbation
U nder
G randma

I have more space likes than you. 
Rel'k Bloodlor
Federation Front Line Report
Federation Front Line
#56 - 2012-01-26 21:08:01 UTC
I like the CSM
There should be roles tho. Or party's.
Plat forms that they have to get voted in for, understand, and are held accountable for.

I wanted to paint my space ship red, but I couldn't find enough goats. 
Barakkus
#57 - 2012-01-26 21:14:26 UTC
Roosterton wrote:
Black Dranzer wrote:
Roosterton wrote:
And you're claiming that this isn't in the interests of the majority of the playerbase?

The problem is the assumption that the majority of the playerbase knows or understands who the CSM are or what they do. I'm not sure that it's safe to make that assumption. I'm not saying the CSM are bad, but the statement that they don't represent the majority of the playerbase is probably accurate if only because the majority of the playerbase probably don't even know they exist.


How don't the majority of the playerbase know they exist? Every election it seems like there's a billion banners saying "make yourself heard in the CSM election!" and "take a moment to cast your vote" on the login screen. If you don't vote in the CSM election, it's either your fault for being ignorant to all of it, or you're just content with things how they are and don't care to vote. Either way; the majority of the playerbase which actually gives a damn is represented.


Who reads the login screen?

http://youtu.be/yytbDZrw1jc
met worst
Doomheim
#58 - 2012-01-26 21:20:02 UTC  |  Edited by: met worst
Black Dranzer wrote:
My only objection with the CSM is that it's something I doubt half the playerbase even knows about. Their presence should be known to the general public of Eve. There should be voting interfaces build into the client.

But then, I come from Australia, where everybody votes because it's compulsory, so maybe my world view is warped.

Still, the CSM appear to have done decent work. I'm more confident about the direction of the game now than when the current CSM came into office, which is about all you can really hope for.

I'm convinced everyone KNOWS about the CSM - the problem is either apathy because it's obvious no highsec alliance/corp can field enough for a bloc vote or they think the process is flawed/pointless.

Perhaps relevance of the CSM to THEIR interests is non-existant?

And yes, in Australia, compulsory voting is quite moot because attendance is the only requirement - not a valid vote. (which is why it's stupid to have compulsory voting).

Regardless people cannot say they rule by a majority when the majority don't even vote. You simply cannot say that winning the majority of 10% of people is now representing 90% of the playerbase. That's obvious BS.

And I'm seeing people trying to draw parallels to IRL democracy. Yeah? Even the US is based on geographical representation - not by the size of the political party.

Eve's CSM system could quite possibly be ruled by a single alliance regardless of where you reside (Goons for example could field all CSM candidates - it's not restricted to alliance/corp - it's based on the individual - NO democratic system does that)

It's no more than a metagaming numbers game. Think what THAT would do to a democracy if it was IRL.
met worst
Doomheim
#59 - 2012-01-26 22:23:21 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
met worst wrote:
>> SAVE THE GAME - KILL THE CSM

Dump them. Sack them. Kiss 'em off.


Find a method that represents ALL players and let's not have another year of self-congratulatory BS served in ego-wrap.

Follow the path taken with Crucible, listen to the majority when they speak (i.e. Jita Riots) and refuse to acknowledge the self-servers who claimed credit for what YOU, CCP, ultimately did.

IGNORE the morons that did everything they could to BRING THE GAME INTO DISREPUTE with public "foot stamping" - the same people that pushed for game changes for the betterment of their own alliances. A MINORITY of EVE.

CSM 6 is corrupt, biased and downright dangerous for THE GAME.

WE DO NOT want a repeat.

CONSIDER random surveys from random players ad hoc to draw opinions/direction.


>> SAVE THE GAME - KILL THE CSM



70% of the CSM votes went to people who got elected. That's pretty damb representative.

People who didn't vote might not be represented so well, but that's not CCPs fault, still less the CSM's.

So 70% of a very small fraction of the total is a representative majority in your eyes?

You're living proof why some people shouldn't be allowed to vote in anything until they can pass a basic test.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#60 - 2012-01-26 22:35:48 UTC
The solution is get some candidates that represent the folks being ignored. I encourage you to support

The Voice of Reason Party


I am hoping to get some candidates elected in CSM7 that aren't part of the large power blocks, that would champion parts of Eve CSM6 not only ignored but actively attempted to minimize or regress.

Issler