Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
51 PagesPrevious page1234Next pageLast page
 

Call For Discussion : CSM Voting Reform

First post First post
Author
#21 - 2012-09-08 14:46:11 UTC
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
Goons would probably be better served engaging in that discussion rather than inventing things to tinfoil hat about.


Nah, we're instead discussing in our jabber channels how best to get multiple candidates on board and sink all the pubbie votes that you guys are trying to prioritize.

No worries, dude.
GoonSwarm
#22 - 2012-09-08 14:46:59 UTC
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
Goons would probably be better served engaging in that discussion rather than inventing things to tinfoil hat about.


The Man once again telling me how to think
Goonswarm Federation
#23 - 2012-09-08 14:47:44 UTC
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
Mitanni would still have been elected under this, or probably any, voting system. Robert's post is more concerned at looking at the bottom end of the voting than the top.

And the CSM hasn't decided anything, we talked about it a bunch (hint, we can read and reply to several forum threads at a time, shocking i know) and felt the discussion reached an appropriately structured place that we could start a good conversation with the EVE player base.

Goons would probably be better served engaging in that discussion rather than inventing things to tinfoil hat about.


The CSM Minutes and this new "system" highlights the CSM motivations quite well. Do you really believe any system you invent cannot be gamed by highly organized player blocks? Especially multiple 10k+ blocks of players? All this system is going to do is ensure we vote in 4 of the 7 candidates instead of 1 or 2. We already have a couple ways to blow this system up too, in the span of 15 minutes. Good luck with that.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

Goonswarm Federation
#24 - 2012-09-08 14:48:37 UTC
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
Mitanni would still have been elected under this, or probably any, voting system. Robert's post is more concerned at looking at the bottom end of the voting than the top.

And the CSM hasn't decided anything, we talked about it a bunch (hint, we can read and reply to several forum threads at a time, shocking i know) and felt the discussion reached an appropriately structured place that we could start a good conversation with the EVE player base.

Goons would probably be better served engaging in that discussion rather than inventing things to tinfoil hat about.

Could you explain who suggested overvote penalties that do not exist in STV and why?
Tactical Narcotics Team
#25 - 2012-09-08 14:51:28 UTC
I can't wait to game the **** out of this system.

Maybe I should run for CSM next year? I do like icelandic girls....
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2012-09-08 14:56:48 UTC
It does strike me that this year's CSM is lacking a certain something, something we got used to having with CSM6.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Gallente Federation
#27 - 2012-09-08 15:01:01 UTC
If anything this increases the need for tactical voting. If I want to vote for A (who I think has no chance of getting elected) but under no circumstances would vote for B (who A has listed as their alternate) I have to find a C to vote for. It gets even worse if I think neither A or B will be elected and I wouldn't vote for D who is B's alternate. Having to follow a complicated tree of vote reassignments in order to figure out who I might end up unwittingly supporting is stupid.

You either need to get the resources from CCP to do proper voting reform or not do it at all. Moving to something this stupid because you don't have the coding time is a terrible idea.
Shadow Cartel
#28 - 2012-09-08 15:05:06 UTC
I just wanted to state, for the record, that I could give no ****'s whether a Goon is elected to a future CSM. They represent a large portion of the active, involved player base, and most people would agree that if they can muster the most votes for a candidate, they deserve to be on the council.

Despite the hilarity of the Goons instantly invading the thread assuming that this is all somehow directed at them, that doesn't change the fact that players have been, for many elections now, frustrated with the electoral process and expressed desire to iterate upon it.

If you note the title of the thread, it is a call for discussion. You know, where you bring ideas and share them and discuss their merits. I hope we can all keep this in mind before we continue down the rabbit hole of stupidity that is either "You just want to suppress Goon influence" or "you just want to make sure you all get re-elected".

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Goonswarm Federation
#29 - 2012-09-08 15:06:54 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
I just wanted to state, for the record, that I could give no ****'s whether a Goon is elected to a future CSM. They represent a large portion of the active, involved player base, and most people would agree that if they can muster the most votes for a candidate, they deserve to be on the council.

Despite the hilarity of the Goons instantly invading the thread assuming that this is all somehow directed at them, that doesn't change the fact that players have been, for many elections now, frustrated with the electoral process and expressed desire to iterate upon it.

If you note the title of the thread, it is a call for discussion. You know, where you bring ideas and share them and discuss their merits. I hope we can all keep this in mind before we continue down the rabbit hole of stupidity that is either "You just want to suppress Goon influence" or "you just want to make sure you all get re-elected".


Perhaps you could explain the overvote penalty that's been added into the STV vote system with no explanation or justification?
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2012-09-08 15:07:51 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
If you note the title of the thread, it is a call for discussion. You know, where you bring ideas and share them and discuss their merits.

And we're discussing a certain aspect of the suggestion.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Goonswarm Federation
#31 - 2012-09-08 15:09:31 UTC
Like STV has its merits. STV, with an addition that exists nowhere else that is specifically designed to diminish the voting power of specific groups with no explanation? that's when I start breaking out the tinfoil.
#32 - 2012-09-08 15:10:12 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
I just wanted to state, for the record, that I could give no ****'s whether a Goon is elected to a future CSM. They represent a large portion of the active, involved player base, and most people would agree that if they can muster the most votes for a candidate, they deserve to be on the council.

Despite the hilarity of the Goons instantly invading the thread assuming that this is all somehow directed at them, that doesn't change the fact that players have been, for many elections now, frustrated with the electoral process and expressed desire to iterate upon it.

If you note the title of the thread, it is a call for discussion. You know, where you bring ideas and share them and discuss their merits. I hope we can all keep this in mind before we continue down the rabbit hole of stupidity that is either "You just want to suppress Goon influence" or "you just want to make sure you all get re-elected".



We've been discussing how stupid it is and also wanting to know why you guys added things into the STV that didn't exist in it before.
Goonswarm Federation
#33 - 2012-09-08 15:10:13 UTC
I for one welcome our eternal triumvirate rather than our president for life :twisted: :smug:
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2012-09-08 15:17:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Sal Volatile
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
I just wanted to state, for the record, that I could give no ****'s whether a Goon is elected to a future CSM. They represent a large portion of the active, involved player base, and most people would agree that if they can muster the most votes for a candidate, they deserve to be on the council.

Despite the hilarity of the Goons instantly invading the thread assuming that this is all somehow directed at them, that doesn't change the fact that players have been, for many elections now, frustrated with the electoral process and expressed desire to iterate upon it.

If you note the title of the thread, it is a call for discussion. You know, where you bring ideas and share them and discuss their merits. I hope we can all keep this in mind before we continue down the rabbit hole of stupidity that is either "You just want to suppress Goon influence" or "you just want to make sure you all get re-elected".



But they have been discussing it, while current CSM members have been posting extremely defensively, like your post above. I think that's very telling.

I think it's very interesting that you've characterized posting and critiquing as "invading." It demonstrates that this is not a politically neutral idea, and that you are not interested in genuine criticism.
Goonswarm Federation
#35 - 2012-09-08 15:21:23 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
I just wanted to state, for the record, that I could give no ****'s whether a Goon is elected to a future CSM. They represent a large portion of the active, involved player base, and most people would agree that if they can muster the most votes for a candidate, they deserve to be on the council.

Despite the hilarity of the Goons instantly invading the thread assuming that this is all somehow directed at them, that doesn't change the fact that players have been, for many elections now, frustrated with the electoral process and expressed desire to iterate upon it.

If you note the title of the thread, it is a call for discussion. You know, where you bring ideas and share them and discuss their merits. I hope we can all keep this in mind before we continue down the rabbit hole of stupidity that is either "You just want to suppress Goon influence" or "you just want to make sure you all get re-elected".



Sure! Explain your reasoning on the overvote penalty then. For those who may not realize the implications of such.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

Gallente Federation
#36 - 2012-09-08 15:23:50 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
I just wanted to state, for the record, that I could give no ****'s whether a Goon is elected to a future CSM. They represent a large portion of the active, involved player base, and most people would agree that if they can muster the most votes for a candidate, they deserve to be on the council.

Despite the hilarity of the Goons instantly invading the thread assuming that this is all somehow directed at them, that doesn't change the fact that players have been, for many elections now, frustrated with the electoral process and expressed desire to iterate upon it.

If you note the title of the thread, it is a call for discussion. You know, where you bring ideas and share them and discuss their merits. I hope we can all keep this in mind before we continue down the rabbit hole of stupidity that is either "You just want to suppress Goon influence" or "you just want to make sure you all get re-elected".



Perhaps you could comment on why this is a goal then?

Trebor Daehdoow wrote:

3) Reduce (but not eliminate) the advantages held by highly organized voting blocs. In the previous election, for example, one voting bloc did extremely sophisticated exit-polling; if they had chosen to use this information to efficiently split their votes, they could have won 3 of the top 7 positions on the CSM.


As far as I know no serious electoral reform has ever had "reduce the impact of voter and candidate organisation", why are internet spaceship governments special? Surely organised candidates make better CSM members and organised voters are more likely to have a greater investment in the process and the game in general.
Goonswarm Federation
#37 - 2012-09-08 15:27:15 UTC
"We are posting this idea as a call for discussion"

*people start a discussion on why the idea is bad*

"Grr why are people INVADING and TINFOILING this thread, we wanted a discussion"

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

Caldari State
#38 - 2012-09-08 15:27:35 UTC  |  Edited by: serras bang
i got an idea why dont we do stv and when the loggin screen comes up so dose the ballot and all we have to do is click 3 names and send ?

if none of the three get through that you enter your votes are classed as null invoid and are lost from the system of votes.

to help this along there could be ts3 or something orginised for each candidate to chat with the people there going to focus on like a press conferance that everyone is invited to witch all of these can have an advert for at the login screen ?
The Bastion
#39 - 2012-09-08 15:32:18 UTC
Wow! It's like you guys read my mind; I wrote a post about this a couple of days ago.

That said, I wholeheartedly support election reform as the opportunity for large blocs to "lock down" CSM seats is an issue that is only growing more obvious with time. If left unchecked, this will become increasingly destructive to the integrity and legitimacy of the Council as the CSM grows in influence and relevance.

That said, I don't agree that your current reform suggestions are consistent with the "keep it simple, stupid" paradigm you're trying to espouse. I DO agree that voting only for one member of a 14-seat council is counter-productive to achieving adequate representation of the citizens of New Eden, and would like the opportunity to support more than one candidate for election. As it was correctly stated, the current system often forces players to have to choose between their particular "voting issues" as to which they hold more dear. Consequently, the current election system does a poor job of representing even a single player, let alone the body politic.

Regardless, thank you for taking issue with the current system and refusing to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Despite the tinfoil already lining the walls of this thread, this is truly an important and relevant issue.
Goonswarm Federation
#40 - 2012-09-08 15:32:19 UTC
serras bang wrote:
i got an idea why dont we do stv and when the loggin screen comes up so dose the ballot and all we have to do is click 3 names and send ?

Because those people who don't pay attention or vote now will just click the first three names they see (if you're talking about mandatory voting) or skip it to get into game (if not).

It solves nothing.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

51 PagesPrevious page1234Next pageLast page
Forum Jump