These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

WHY the majority doesn't vote for CSM

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
EnslaverOfMinmatar
You gonna get aped
#41 - 2012-01-27 08:56:20 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:
EnslaverOfMinmatar wrote:
I voted 'none' or something like that last time.


Thank you for the vote. You can vote for me again this year.


I definitely will.

Every EVE player must read this http://www.eveonline.com/background/potw/default.asp?cid=29-01-07
Grumpy Owly
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#42 - 2012-01-27 08:56:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Grumpy Owly
RubyPorto wrote:
Since when do I run my mouth with bullshit?* Also, BullPoop? What are we, 5?



*Ok, I can think of a handful of rants I'm not particularly happy with, and times when I got schooled because of it, but for the most part, the fact that my argumentative tone tends to be sarcastic and mocking doesn't change the fact that I try to include reasoned points. Hell, even my "POOP!" comment was intended to point out that since we don't seem to see random profanity, it's likely nobody has typer's Tourettes.



Well you did chose the use of the word Poop. Might want to re-examine where the childishness originates from.

Keyword in my argument being "consistantly". You only have to review a small amout of Lady Spanks posts to see how much of an inane troll poster he/she is. And yet this is a person who according to the C&P forum wishes to run for candidacy? I'd be suprised if he/she could even spell the word manifesto let alone understand what one is and produce one. Totally encourage the production of one howerver, maybe call it:

"Waah!, Waah!, I don't like that, it's stupid." - Party Manifesto (and leave the pages blank)

Sufficiently unjustifies your defence that you don't come out with "fabricated dellusions" of reality, imho, and continue to be the "comedic sarcastic" poster if you wish. If anything it makes you worse with your attitude of condoning idiots like this, perhaps worse as you sit behind them egging them on. However I realise it must be hard with popularity rather than integrity being an important consideration for you. Funny thing is, this doesn't make you in any way correct in your opinions.

Otherwise are you saying that you encourage posters to simply use contrite insulting posts to things they don't agree with without offering a view to the subject or at least attempting to offer something to a process?

If so have an ice cream and keep quiet whilst the adults talk please.

(Also with tourettes it is a condition where the urge to do something overwieghs the aspect of control, and the extreme case of use of obsence words is actually only representative in a small minority of those sufferers. Depsite that I use the term here purely as a descripter for the style of behaviour. I mean no offence to the individuals who suffer from it. But I suppose like the R-word it isn't welcome, so I'll refrain from using it further and replace it with a more accurate term or something akin to "speaking without thinking".)

Bounty Hunting - Soon (™): Retribution (Winter 2012)

It's just criminal - Smuggling
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#43 - 2012-01-27 09:18:51 UTC
Vyl Vit wrote:
The majority of players are convinced CCP will do nothing to address anything they consider in need of attention. The majority believes, as they do with real life institutions, that CCP has already established the limits they'll allow from player input. CCP revels in the thought that the majority believes there is some real player input that is significant to the majority of players, but beyond that belief, has no intention of doing anything but pretend the majority never said anything at all.

The CSM, however, specializes in advocating what CCP already agrees with. They simply push for a fine-tuning of matters the majority of players don't even deal with at all. This serves two functions for CCP. a.) It allows them to claim they listen to player input. b.) It frees them from having to listen to the majority - period.

The majority of players will NEVER vote for CSM since the CSM does nothing that affects the majority but ensure nothing is done with regard to the majority, and since that's the way things normally are, it's a wash. The majority does, however, agree in whole that the CSM is a joke, but it's the kind of joke the majority is accustomed to...not funny, and totally irrelevant.

SO....

Vote for me for CSM. I can booty-kiss and sling BS with the best of them!



Quote:
Blessed be the ignorant


Maby they don't know such thing exists, and those that vote in majority are drones of 0.0 overlords

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude
Teowulff Odinson
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#44 - 2012-01-27 11:02:31 UTC
Jenny Cameron wrote:
Most people have no idea what they are voting for and don't bother to look it up. How can you possibly know who's the best option out of 60 candidates?? For most players it's one big blur.
Even if you're one of the few that actually finds and uses the matching tool (thanks to whoever made it) your most fitting candidate may still not get elected and you still may only have a 60% match.

It's also very casual player unfriendly. Some organized big alliances may appoint a few candidates that everyone in it has to vote for. A lot of votes of less hardcore players, if they vote at all, are spread across the board and are lost. So the outcome of the election is very much flawed and by no means representative of what your actual playerbase really wants.
Being organized has a far greater impact than having good ideas.

Why doesn't CCP let people vote for ideas instead of people? Why no polls? That way they know what their player base wants, no votes are lost and more people may vote, simply because it's far more straightforward than voting for people.
Voting for people is a very indirect way to see what your players want.

I think i can agree with this.
Vyl Vit
#45 - 2012-01-27 13:29:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Vyl Vit
Mr Epeen wrote:
Vyl Vit wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
No...

The majority don't vote because they think the game is just fine the way it is and they really don't care about yet another event put on by CCP that is meaningless to them.

Mr Epeen Cool

No...the majority does NOT think everything's just fine the way it is. The majority just deals with things as they are knowing it's futile to say anything.


I wasn't talking about forum dweebs. I was talking about the people who actually play the game.

Try making a new character and spending some time in corp chat. These guys are, for the most part, having a blast. Your problem is you are bogged down with the idea that the no-lifes that spend their days here instead of enjoying the game are somehow representative of the EVE population in general.

That's not the case.

Mr Epeen Cool

Odd you should say that. I just ran a toon through the tutorial in November. You are assuming quite a bit. In fact, your response here is no more than a general stereotype based on conventional wisdom. I talk to people who're playing the game and having a ball with it. How does caring about CSM factor into not having fun with the game? Nice attempt at a
s t r e t c h there. No cigar.

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.
Jarnis McPieksu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2012-01-27 13:42:03 UTC
We clearly need streamed live candidate debates where a moderator grills the candidates on tough issues so even highsec carebears can weed out the "harmful influence" of Goons and vote on a candidate that supports their cause. Twisted
Jarnis McPieksu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2012-01-27 13:42:57 UTC
Teowulff Odinson wrote:
Jenny Cameron wrote:
Most people have no idea what they are voting for and don't bother to look it up. How can you possibly know who's the best option out of 60 candidates?? For most players it's one big blur.
Even if you're one of the few that actually finds and uses the matching tool (thanks to whoever made it) your most fitting candidate may still not get elected and you still may only have a 60% match.

It's also very casual player unfriendly. Some organized big alliances may appoint a few candidates that everyone in it has to vote for. A lot of votes of less hardcore players, if they vote at all, are spread across the board and are lost. So the outcome of the election is very much flawed and by no means representative of what your actual playerbase really wants.
Being organized has a far greater impact than having good ideas.

Why doesn't CCP let people vote for ideas instead of people? Why no polls? That way they know what their player base wants, no votes are lost and more people may vote, simply because it's far more straightforward than voting for people.
Voting for people is a very indirect way to see what your players want.

I think i can agree with this.


We need Space Political Parties, obviously.
Prince Kobol
#48 - 2012-01-27 13:44:44 UTC
I would love to see a None of the Above option added but it will never happen simply because of the potential embarrassment it could cause.

What would CCP and the CSM do if the None of the Above option received more votes then anyone else?

Scrap the CSM?

Admit that the CSM has become nothing more than another form of meta gaming for the null sec alliances?

Also the majority of players don't vote because the majority couldn't give a ****. You can not play the game and not know about the anything about the CSM elections considering you see it advertised every time you log in.
Zagam
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#49 - 2012-01-27 13:46:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Zagam
This really, really makes sense. Lets not vote our opinion because we don't think it counts.

If you don't vote, you definitely won't get the changes you want. If you don't vote your opinion, you can't whine when you don't get what you want.
Zagam
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#50 - 2012-01-27 13:48:46 UTC
Jarnis McPieksu wrote:
We clearly need streamed live candidate debates where a moderator grills the candidates on tough issues so even highsec carebears can weed out the "harmful influence" of Goons and vote on a candidate that supports their cause. Twisted


I can see it now:

"What is more important - your wife, or EVE?"

Candidate A: "My wife, duh"
Candidate B: "My girlfriend"
Candidate C: "I'm still a virgin and living with my mom, so EVE"
Jafit McJafitson
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#51 - 2012-01-27 14:05:57 UTC
I like how the same 3 or 4 posters on these forums claim to represent the silent majority of Eve players.
Cathy Drall
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#52 - 2012-01-27 15:26:00 UTC
Jarnis McPieksu wrote:
We need Space Political Parties, obviously.

yes I think that's a good idea. It defilnitely would make things clearer for the average casual EVE voter and their specific main interests.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#53 - 2012-01-27 15:26:32 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
I would love to see a None of the Above option added but it will never happen simply because of the potential embarrassment it could cause.

What would CCP and the CSM do if the None of the Above option received more votes then anyone else?

Current CSM would disband.
No new CSM would appear.
Any discussion with players would be stoped (players don't need it anyway).

I suppose this is what you want?Shocked

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Jenny Cameron
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#54 - 2012-01-27 15:31:51 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
I would love to see a None of the Above option added but it will never happen simply because of the potential embarrassment it could cause.

What would CCP and the CSM do if the None of the Above option received more votes then anyone else?

Current CSM would disband.
No new CSM would appear.
Any discussion with players would be stoped (players don't need it anyway).

I suppose this is what you want?Shocked

That's why I suggested that CCP makes a big poll to see what their players really want - instead of some indirect vague elections.
We can all see the outcome of the poll and we can all judge if CCP has done anything with it. That's a lot harder with representatives.
Zagam
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#55 - 2012-01-27 15:56:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Zagam
Jenny Cameron wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
I would love to see a None of the Above option added but it will never happen simply because of the potential embarrassment it could cause.

What would CCP and the CSM do if the None of the Above option received more votes then anyone else?

Current CSM would disband.
No new CSM would appear.
Any discussion with players would be stoped (players don't need it anyway).

I suppose this is what you want?Shocked

That's why I suggested that CCP makes a big poll to see what their players really want - instead of some indirect vague elections.
We can all see the outcome of the poll and we can all judge if CCP has done anything with it. That's a lot harder with representatives.


"indirect vague elections"... HUH?

How are they indirect, and how are the vague?

1 account = 1 vote. highest 7 votes win. top candidate is chairman. That is about as direct as you can get.

Vague - what do you want, a CSM full of single-issue candidates?

As for an EVE-wide poll... how would that "fix" anything? You would still have an issue of full participation. You will still have people crying about lack of representation for turtles who play EVE and fly only Ibis in missions. You can't make everyone happy. Trying to do is a plan destined for failure - kinda like this thread.
Jenny Cameron
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#56 - 2012-01-27 16:00:50 UTC
Zagam wrote:
"indirect vague elections"... HUH?

How are they indirect, and how are the vague?

1 account = 1 vote. highest 7 votes win. top candidate is chairman. That is about as direct as you can get.

Vague - what do you want, a CSM full of single-issue candidates?

Vague as in the average player has no idea what candidates stand for and the differences between them,.
It's everything but transparent.
So most non-fanatical hardcore players just doesn't bother.

If people vote for ideas or parties, things already get a lot easier and clearer.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#57 - 2012-01-27 16:20:45 UTC
Dirk Magnum wrote:


I just don't see the problem. My only issue is that alts get a vote, but I highly doubt CCP has a tool to prevent that.


They have that tool, they use it to ban all the accounts of a botter in one shot.
For what I understand it's a cross between user data and payment data.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#58 - 2012-01-27 16:27:13 UTC
Jenny Cameron wrote:

Vague as in the average player has no idea what candidates stand for and the differences between them,.
It's everything but transparent.
So most non-fanatical hardcore players just doesn't bother.

If people vote for ideas or parties, things already get a lot easier and clearer.


This is EvE.

The game where you are supposed to learn to do your homeworks (that included learning ammo names before they went the simpleton way Blink).

Those who don't bother, CBA, "just don't care", "CSM will do nothing" etc. deserve to be ignored.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Jafit McJafitson
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#59 - 2012-01-27 19:28:28 UTC
People in this thread are going to be so pissed when they find out how people in the real world get into positions of authority.
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#60 - 2012-01-27 19:29:25 UTC
We need debates.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.