Jita Park Speakers Corner

This is simply drawing a conclusion that the most popular candidates won in a voting process and that 12 of the highest constintuted the highest proportion of votes. Why should we be suprised by this, would we seriously expect the proportion of votes to be comprised of the candidates who weren't elected?



Which also mean 1 in 3 who voted didnt get the representation they wanted.



There is no evidence to support your claims here. Citation needed to support them please, otherwise its mere speculation.


The conclusions drawn however cannot be supported simply by population distributions although there will likley be some bias here with associated interests. But its uncertain how the division of alts and other interests vary with regional preferences. So whilst it is probabale based on this understanding it is no way clear to draw area distinctions with behaviour of voting. If you think it is, then please provided the numbers to support the claims of how the allocation of each voter's area is attributed accordingly from general numbers.


The only valuable statistic provided was that less than 15 percent voted. Which shows a poor turn out and a poor representation mandate for the CSM. So yes Apathy can be seen as a problem for the CSM6. If you base it on RL political elections associated with politics the electorate is in the 60 percent margin (US & UK), so 4 times as proportionate. Would expect similar figures with other "stable" democracies (apologies if I missed a anyone here, limited time to research everyone). Moreso in mandatory electorate systems like Australia where you are required by law to vote.

How this will turn out for CSM7 is uncertain. And although voting seems to be more active than the previous CSM6 which maybe encouraging to see, it is also too early to draw a conclusion that apathy has been removed. As people may simply be voting earlier rather than more people voting. We obviously need to wait to see the figures as they surpass previous years voting total or as the voting period grows closer to completion to be able to draw any certain conclusion of an increased electorate. I hope it does however.



So yes, things do look more effective that more interest may be apparent to the process. But like I said it may be due to voting habits that people are voting earlier, not that there are more of them.

Early graph (so pretty inconclusive): CSM7 Votes graph so far

Since 33,854 as the last reported figure of this years voting is still 68 percent of the last years 49,096 CSM6 voting number.

So although voting appears to be more active, and I really hope it is, since I have personally invested time into this as you can see from my sig. It is still too early to draw any certain conclusions that there is more "total" electorate this year.

One interesting thing also to remember about these numbers is that it also includes abstentions.

I would get on a soap box and say "Vote EvE community!", but seeing as this is being posted in the CSM forum seems largley pointless, as people interested in topics here I would suggest already have a vested interest in EvE politics?

Be interesting to see how the weekend influences the figures.

welcome to democracy

Edit: Inappropriate comment removed, CCP Phantom

How can you draw the conclusion that I'm not a promoter of democracy for the CSM elections from that? Other than you don't simply like my personal view concerning Mittens, which could account for the missguided hostility. Though that can be simply interpreted as idiot Goon troll also. Especially when I was talking about and trying to promote voting as per my obvious view of stopping apathy?

I'm not a politician my interest in the stats here is mainly from an academic point of view of the use of interpretaion with statistics. I'll leave it to the politicians to twist the meaning as to how it relates to them. But at the end of the day a fact is a fact. The above example being an emotive contra interpretation from the view presented using the same figure.

But just to correct the view about how I do in fact support CSM democracy.

It's clear that Hi-Sec pilots need a candidate to rally around, someone who is recognisable, someone who stands out from the crowd.

Like this cute little girl who makes youtube videos of Eve, that's pretty distinctive.

Is that video supposed to simulate the migraine anyone who tries to take your ideas seriously will get?

Most of the extra votes in the initial 3 days of voting seem to have come from blocs, who are even more engaged this time than they were in CSM6. We're seeing 30% more voting from GSF alone. The rest of EVE hasn't woken up to the importance of the CSM; their loss.

CSM elections should be turned into isk sinks. If CSM candidates had to pay a few billions of isk to run, I'm sure you'd see less candidates but better ones and with more structured programs and ideas. The way things are now less than a handful can write in full sentences.

And if voters had to pay themselves to vote too, I think more people would actually vote. Like it or not, people love paying for stuff a lot more than getting it for free. Maybe even more so if by taking advantage of the vanity items you could get a shirt with "vote *insert cadidate name here*" once you voted for someone.

The smug rolls in pretty thick around here sometimes, dunnit?

Plutocracy is by far the fairest form of government.

And its not as if people (including me) haven't gone to a lot of trouble to drum up higher participation and encouraged hisecers to vote. After spending most of last year seeing an average of one new thread a day whining that empire doesn't get represented, I thinkwe're entitled to ask where all those unrepresented hi secers are now its voting time.

Here's hoping that at least Hans gets in. The fw guys seem more organised at least.