Also counting the opinions of the 90% of players who don’t even vote?
What weight should have the CSM compared to other ways to interact with customers?
Many seem to think that hiring community developers to actually engage players would work better to know what do the un-herded masses think about their playground…
Here’s something novel, focus groups often get called up for upcoming changes where the CSM and/or CCP want larger group feedback. Instead of hurf and blurfing about the results, results that are the product of voter apathy that you can’t blame nullsec for, why don’t you devote energies on participating on those?
Or maybe participate in feedback by submitting detailed analysis of a given game mechanic/module/ship and break down the changes you’d like to see made with rational explainationa why, over on the feedback section.
Or maybe start organising for the next CSM now and get an organised, motivated voting block to get a candidate the disparate groups of lowsec, wormhole or hisec could get behind, or whatever.
I was watching the bars in barchart in monthly economic report and it looks like game is dying but goons didnt notice it yet, mining 24/7 and ratting. Maybe that is also why there is so much goons in CSM. Few else really care anyway…
Ok…I’ll admit that those figures were just sodding gobbledygook to me, they meant nothing.
If that’s the best voting system CCP can come up with, I give in.
I think this is a pretty good voting system. You choose your candidates in order of preference. If your top pick gets elected, then game over for your vote. You got what you wanted.
If your top pick got the least votes, however, he is eliminated, and your vote transfers to your second choice.
If that candidate is also eliminated, your vote transfers to your third choice, and so on, until either all positions are filled, or your vote is used to elect a candidate.
In years that I have voted, it has been extremely easy to do so, and no election passes that I feel I didn’t have the opportunity to vote, or sufficient notice to get my vote in.
I am against the idea of guaranteed seats for certain descriptions of space. The STV system allows for pretty fair representation on its own, and trying to neatly categorize people isn’t always going to work. The best people to decide who best represents the interests of the people are the people, and the people can vote for their preference.
It is the responsibility of CCP to provide the people with the power to elect their representatives. One responsibility I can say they’ve delivered on very well. It is the people who are responsible for exercising their right to be heard by voting in the elections to shape the CSM into a body that accurately represents their interests.
CCP Guard said vote buying is currently not considered illegal, so nothing will happen.
Also I didn’t ask for a ban, just for removing from CSM, because a recount showed that without those bought votes he wouldn’t have made it.
Also this!
I meant a ban from the csm, but if what you say is true then I presume you have exact numbers of voters who voted for him just for the isk?
About three fiddy. I don’t, that’s why I said “If that is true”. The source was the New Eden Report where a guy spilled beans on the details of the deal, which included voting for The Judge, another GSF candidate and some specific low ranking candidates in a specific order to prove that the votes had been done to secure the payout. Suitonia went through CCPs published data then, did a recount and published the results in the following reddit thread:
Edit: the first commentor was wrong, because there were 4 and not 3 different sets that voted in this way. You have to look further through the comments.
353 The Judge Innominate Vincent Eneticum Cacique Yuhasz Raphendyr Nardieu Solar Taranogas Syncopee Farnsworth
79 The Judge Innominate Solar Taranogas Raphendyr Nardieu Syncopee Farnsworth Cacique Yuhasz Vincent Eneticum
67 The Judge Innominate Cacique Yuhasz Syncopee Farnsworth Vincent Eneticum Raphendyr Nardieu Solar Taranogas
42 The Judge Innominate Raphendyr Nardieu Vincent Eneticum Cacique Yuhasz Syncopee Farnsworth Solar Taranogas
~ Total of 541 Votes, resulting in tikktokks election over the judge.
But it doesn’t matter. Buying and selling votes is considered legal right now.
It’s because compelling or otherwise incentivizing your entire null-sec alliance to vote a specific way is completely legal, too. When you get large enough to literally print your own ISK anything is possible.
I am not sure wether motivating your members to support candidates and creating a public market for CSM votes is quite the same thing.
Anyway, the best solution would be for the next CSM elections to be an in-game event which offers some rewards for running it.
My draft would look like this:
CSM elections 2019 - Event
1 runable in all areas of space, no need for specific location
2 First reward for Omegas is for voting and gives 5 points which leads to: SP Accelerator
3 Other tasks/rewards…
4 At 95 points Alphas get their final challenge which is Voting as well (maybe 50% of the weight of Omega?)
This way you might make the elections much more visible to a greater number of people and you could even include Alphas. Taken that the challenges are sufficiently time-consuming, Alphas could be able to vote at the end of it. Well maybe not for 100% of the weight of a Omega vote. I’m confident that with proper planning you could make the creation of Alphas just for voting unviable over simply buying 500 PLEX, while encouraging active Alpha pilots to take a step deeper into the community by casting a vote.
In order to disencourage people from trading CSM votes and weakening the voting power of SP harvester farms, you’d need to turn point 2 around, thus making every Omega who wants to vote undock and earn 5 Event points before being able to vote. While this would probably cost less time and be easier than logging in to a Website, people might moan about it.
What do you think lowsec should be, Jeremiah?
too many Goons in the council
Indeed. It’s not just that absolute power corrupts absolutely, it’s that those who are drawn to power are addicted to it once they taste it and can’t handle it being shut off.
This is why term limits are a thing IRL. We probably need term limits (or max term #s) for CSM.
All of the nullsec alliances/coalitions have massive vote power and have used it in each CSM election since I entered the game (summer of 2013, I’ve voted in every election since 2014), and that’s fine as long as they balance each other, but this year’s… this year’s shows a distinct lack of balance similar to that shown in the monthly economic report. No, it’s not so much the fault of the goons as it is the fault of the other superpowers of nullsec for not checking their power.
I like the system as well, and my first CSM election after starting to play EVE, back in 2014, was the first time I’d ever used this voting system. It made immediate sense to me and I wish all elections IRL I vote in could be more like it.
But… Would you believe there are those in the US who are against ranked choice ballot voting or whatever you want to call it because they feel it allows some people (the ones who don’t get their first choice elected right off the bat) to “vote multiple times” and other people (the ones who DO get their first choice elected) only get to “vote once”…
Serious talk show on national public radio had a show about it a week or two ago with multiple people espousing both for and against views on it because of all the 2018 primary elections as more and more localities and states are shifting to something like the CSM system and away from the “vote for only 1 person, then come back and vote again in the runoff a few weeks later because A got 30%, B got 20%, C got 15%, D got 10%, and who cares about E-F-G-H down there on the ground below them” system Americans have been used to for decades and decades.
I’ve lived in highsec most of my 5 years in EVE, but I’ve gone on many NPSI roams through low and null, and for most months in game, my zkill would show mostly activity in low or null, very little in high… but I was a high seccer.
I now live in highsec part of the time and in a wormhole the other part of the time, trying out wormhole life for the first time besides just daytripping into them for PVE, and now more and more of my killmail activity will be in WH, but… not sure I’m ready to call myself a WHer just yet. Dabblin’.
Stats don’t tell the whole story.
But if you insist on using them, % of downtimes spent in HS/LS/NS/WH space would probably be a better one than just PVE or PVP activity. Because home is where you sleep, after all. ;D
Not the best thread in which to start this discussion (see: can of worms, Pandora’s box.) Consider making a new Assembly Hall thread (what is it now / what should it be) for each area of space to solicit feedback, then sit back with your fellow CSM’s and take notes on the range of diverse opinions.
Grrrrr… CSM.
If one had 10 people, each with an IQ of 100, and put them all together, then it doesn’t automatically make the group of people to have an IQ of 1000. So when one has a lot of members from one particular alliance sitting in the CSM will they not be doing much else as if they only had one of them in there. What matters is who else got in and it seems we still have good mix of people in the CSM.
If it was different and say we had a wide-spread mix of people in the CSM, each with their own view on issues, will this usually end up being a problem, because then hardly anything gets accomplished.
Just my $.02 on the “fear of overlords”.
I think its more about ideas.
We had all those ideas already, there are thousand of threads of the past years. Its like having thousands of very creative people and CSM is not really needed. They need one crative director who have resources to his disposition. Someone who understands why people want to play EVE and what they expect from it.
My only disappointment is that I didn’t get a vote or two.
Don’t get me wrong, I didn’t actually run for CSM, but I figure the way the numbers panned out, and with the obvious shenanigans going on in the background, it should have at least been a statistical possibility.
Anyway, congratulations to all of those who won. I voted for the first time ever this year. I didn’t know a damned single one of you, but I liked the high sec care bear’s style. There was also someone else who had a terribly disfiguring scar…I felt sorry for him, so I think I tossed him a preference. I can’t quite remember, I might have been drunk at the time.
I’m thinking of running next year. My campaign slogan: “To Bee, or not to Bee.”