Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 34 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
204
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:12:00 -
[151] - Quote
While we're at it lets make MInmatar only get 3/5ths of a vote. This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
fofofo |
Haquer
Vorkuta Inc Goonswarm Federation
136
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:15:00 -
[152] - Quote
Dramaticus wrote:While we're at it lets make MInmatar only get 3/5ths of a vote.
Damn, son. |
Remnant Madeveda
Ixion Defence Systems Test Alliance Please Ignore
10
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:24:00 -
[153] - Quote
You know, something to consider, Look at this post, look at who has posted, and look at the likes, from those derive who actually cares about the CSM and voting. Wow, looks like we've just accomplished a huge goal for voting reform, we know who votes, who gives a ****, and who doesn't know their Back side from a hole in the ground.
Now that we've covered that, we can move on to more important things. How are those POS changes coming? How about the rebalance of Null/Low/High? Have we made any ground on attending to the concerns of the WH space? Have we improved the new player experience? Is there any chance of not punishing players for past misdeeds because they told you about an issue, then when you ignored it, they gamed the system, and proved you incorrect? Finally as a last question, what is the next serious goal for the CSM? |
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1412
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:27:00 -
[154] - Quote
Remnant Madeveda wrote:what is the next serious goal for the CSM?
We need to have a serious discussion about the in game font. |
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1078
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:31:00 -
[155] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: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. No offense, but why wouldn't they assume this is directed at them when Trebor makes mention of them twice as reasons that the voting system has to change?
Quote:. . . some candidates have increasingly overwhelming information and organizational advantages, threatens to effectively disenfranchise a significant portion of the electorate.
Quote:. . . 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. Caldari Militia |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9403
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:37:00 -
[156] - Quote
Two step wrote:The issue I have with STV is that making voting *harder* isn't going to increase voter turnout numbers. Certainly the system Trebor proposed has some downsides, but one thing it does get right is that the voters wouldn't have to expend much more effort. GǪbut again, that's pretty much unavoidable.
The thing is, almost all standard voting systems are meant to elect one candidate, and pretty much all the mechanisms in elections these days revolve around turning that single vote into a ranking (usually by counting who got the one vote the most) or some kind of proportional distribution. The reason STV is so handy is because it is in and of itself a ranking system that is also a single vote (for that proportion-counting part), so you get the bit you wanted in the end for freeGǪ
GǪexcept that ranking is inherently more complicated than voting for one thing. The CSM is a ranked body; the difficulties of ranking are thus inherent and inescapable so the only question is how flawed you want it to be. Anyway, the standard way of simplifying STV is to reduce the number of ranking slots. Once you get down to two or three, it's not particularly difficult at all on either end of the process. Likewise, there are simplifications that can be done in the counting process GÇö whether or not to do a full recount between rounds or not GÇö that reduce the work load on that end.
Picking three slots isn't much more effort than picking one, and the proposed system still requires you to understand both the candidate you're voting for and the candidate s/he is GÇ£votingGÇ¥ for with the transfer, so the one thing that really keeps people from voting GÇö reading up on the candidates GÇö is still there. Those who are interested in voting to begin with will not be all that deterred if they have to pick their top three rather than just their top one (and the entire point GÇö that you vote is much less likely to be wasted GÇö is still there and is still a strong argument to pull new voters in). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1078
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:39:00 -
[157] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Assuming for a moment that any large entity was capable of and succeeded in achieving 3/14 seats on CSM. This is over 20% of council representation. I think most players can understand that there might be something unfair about any group that holds less than 20% of the player population covering 20% of the council. Does anyone see any reason for that discrepancy to exist, or have an explanation as to how that discrepancy benefits the players? Because nowhere near 100% of the playerbase votes? Instead of rigging the vote to disenfranchise Goon votes, why not figure out how to get more players to participate in the voting process? That will lessen the impact of the Goon bloc.
The Goon bloc is so powerful because such a small percentage of the overall playerbase votes.
Work at getting players to the polls, don't work at rigging the voting rules.
Caldari Militia |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2849
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:39:00 -
[158] - Quote
Poetic Stanziel wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: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. No offense, but why wouldn't they assume this is directed at them when Trebor makes mention of them twice as reasons that the voting system has to change? Quote:. . . some candidates have increasingly overwhelming information and organizational advantages, threatens to effectively disenfranchise a significant portion of the electorate. Quote:. . . 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.
I asked why they felt it targeted the CFC in particular and not "whichever group in the game has the most organized power". In other words, if your worst nightmare came true and Kelduum metagamed EVE University into the largest, most organized player entity in the game, how would Trebor's proposal treat EVE Uni any different than the CFC? Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1413
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:43:00 -
[159] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
I asked why they felt it targeted the CFC in particular and not "whichever group in the game has the most organized power". In other words, if your worst nightmare came true and Kelduum metagamed EVE University into the largest, most organized player entity in the game, how would Trebor's proposal treat EVE Uni any different than the CFC?
Come on son. |
Remnant Madeveda
Ixion Defence Systems Test Alliance Please Ignore
10
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:43:00 -
[160] - Quote
Oh and as to how to get players to vote, three things: First: Send everyone in Game an Evemail that it's time to vote Second: Annoy people reminding them it's time to vote. (Splash updates on the loading screen, propoganda videos etc.) Third: Hold the Election. |
|
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:43:00 -
[161] - Quote
As I've said before, how is "we would disenfranchise anyone who threatened our political power, not just you" a defense?
I'd also like my answer on if the CSM supports this proposal, considering that Trebor clearly presents it as a CSM proposal, not a personal one. |
Alchenar
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
13
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:43:00 -
[162] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Poetic Stanziel wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: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. No offense, but why wouldn't they assume this is directed at them when Trebor makes mention of them twice as reasons that the voting system has to change? Quote:. . . some candidates have increasingly overwhelming information and organizational advantages, threatens to effectively disenfranchise a significant portion of the electorate. Quote:. . . 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. I asked why they felt it targeted the CFC in particular and not "whichever group in the game has the most organized power". In other words, if your worst nightmare came true and Kelduum metagamed EVE University into the largest, most organized player entity in the game, how would Trebor's proposal treat EVE Uni any different than the CFC?
I'm going to write a law that says 'All people called Hans Jagerblitzen must be killed on sight'.
Sure, you happen to be the only person effected by this law but it isn't targetted at you because some other person could change their name to Hans Jagerblitzen. |
Zagdul
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
954
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:43:00 -
[163] - Quote
Stop trying to control the players.
The system works, if we wanna throw 10k votes at a candidate, let us. We all pay (in some form) to play EVE just like anyone else. Our vote should count towards the candidate we want in and not towards a runner up.
In any event, according to Jade, empire has more 'characters' than any part of EVE, so this shouldn't ever happen, right?
A list of fixes for the new inventory
Dual Pane idea clicky |
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
2254
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:48:00 -
[164] - Quote
I'm glad this has sparked a lively discussion, and I hope it continues to evolve. To clarify one point, election reform is something the CSM has been discussing for years, and I have taken the point role in pushing the discussion forward (as was discussed at the May 2012 summit).
EvilweaselFinance wrote:also, unlike actual STV, this system is deliberately designed to penalize overvotes by eliminating ALL of the votes for an elected candidate The preferred candidate of those voters got elected, so their vote was not wasted -- exactly the same result as under the current system.
And IIRC, the noted political philosopher T.H.E. Mittani was one of the people who observed, at the December 2011 CSM Summit, that pure STV would be "heaven for the powerblocks" and "would basically allow them to dictate every single seat on the CSM".
CD-STV is an attempt to address former Chairman Mittani's concerns.
Permitting overvotes to transfer would automatically optimize the voting power of large, organized blocs without any risk of miscalculation, giving them even more voting power than they currently enjoy under the present system. They can still do it if they want (using the tools that were developed for vote tracking in recent elections), but with a certain element of uncertainty. This still gives them a significant edge over smaller groups who cannot effectively track votes for their candidates.
Also keep in mind that the purpose of the CSM elections to elect a council of representatives who can give CCP the best possible advice, and this is not exactly the same goal as in a RL election. Having multiple essentially identical voices on the CSM isn't optimal, which is likely one reason the CFC, who could have easily placed 2 or even 3 candidates into the top 7 in the last election, instead chose to concentrate their votes on a single candidate.
Under CD-STV, the large organized blocs are no worse off; they maintain their voting power, and can still use their information advantage to split votes if they so desire. The major differences in outcome vs. the current system will be likely be seen in slots 10-14.
PS: If the candidates in the previous election would care to let me know what their preferred alternate representatives were, I would be happy to update the simulator to reflect these. For the record, mine would have been: Seleene, Hans, Two Step, Meissa, Alek, leboe and corebloodbrothers. The Sarcasm is Strong with Me GÇó Member of CSM 5-7 GÇó Blog |
Haquer
Vorkuta Inc Goonswarm Federation
142
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:51:00 -
[165] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:CD-STV is an attempt to address former Chairman Mittani's concerns..
Good joke dude! |
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1079
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:51:00 -
[166] - Quote
EvilweaselFinance wrote:Currently, if I vote for Eminiently Qualified Candidate, and you vote for Random Shirtlord Running A Vanity Campaign, but my Eminiently Qualified Candidate already has a quota, you throw out my vote. However, your Random Shirtlord Running a Vanity Campaign vote is preserved (and moved to Random Shirtlord #2). That's what's going on here that's unacceptable. Eminiently Qualified Candidate = The Mittani Random Shirtlord Running A Vanity Campaign = Kelduum
I'd hope The Mittani makes it onto the CSM every day of the week. We should be limiting the Kelduum vote, not The Mittani vote.
Caldari Militia |
Haquer
Vorkuta Inc Goonswarm Federation
142
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:52:00 -
[167] - Quote
Also, since you reappeared to spout some more bullshit, why don't you let us know why disenfranchising bloc voters is okay, please. |
digi
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
121
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:53:00 -
[168] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:I'm glad this has sparked a lively discussion, and I hope it continues to evolve. To clarify one point, election reform is something the CSM has been discussing for years, and I have taken the point role in pushing the discussion forward (as was discussed at the May 2012 summit).
Trebor... Is this all you have to show for your time on the CSM? Seriously?
Go do your job. Jesus. |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
212
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:53:00 -
[169] - Quote
It is astronomically bizarre that the two most petty CSM's have been the two without Goons. I wonder what we take away from that. This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
fofofo |
Lord Zim
1334
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:54:00 -
[170] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:And IIRC, the noted political philosopher T.H.E. Mittani was one of the people who observed, at the December 2011 CSM Summit, that pure STV would be "heaven for the powerblocks" and "would basically allow them to dictate every single seat on the CSM". 1) Citation needed. 2) So you're taking today's system, which has which problem with it again? ... and you're switching it over to a system which is gameable, with a modification which makes it even more gameable?
Okay then. |
|
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
230
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:55:00 -
[171] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:stuff
Block voting is present in almost every current real world electoral system but none of them have tried to "solve" it. Why is it only an issue in internet spaceship politics? |
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1079
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:57:00 -
[172] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:EvilweaselFinance wrote:You've found that to be unacceptable I haven't found anything unacceptable. Trebor wrote the proposal, I'm just here to discuss its merits and drawbacks just like the rest of you. The whole point is to allow the community to shape a set of recommendations that we can take to CCP. It may be that the recommendation we get from the community is that we change nothing at all. I'm pretty open-minded in general. If you don't like something Trebor said, convince me that its bad. I'm listening. There's no need to argue in the meantime as if this was something every one of the CSM members is personally trying to mandate. So far Trebor is not responding to any of this ... why is he so willing to let you take all the heat?
You need to stop responding, and let the man with the plan step up to defend his voting scheme.
Caldari Militia |
Lord Zim
1334
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:57:00 -
[173] - Quote
Yeep wrote:Trebor Daehdoow wrote:stuff Block voting is present in almost every current real world electoral system but none of them have tried to "solve" it. Why is it only an issue in internet spaceship politics? Because:
Blawrf McTaggart wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-A09a_gHJc
|
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
139
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:58:00 -
[174] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote: Permitting overvotes to transfer would automatically optimize the voting power of large, organized blocs without any risk of miscalculation, giving them even more voting power than they currently enjoy under the present system. They can still do it if they want (using the tools that were developed for vote tracking in recent elections), but with a certain element of uncertainty. This still gives them a significant edge over smaller groups who cannot effectively track votes for their candidates.
In other words: allowing an accurate, fair vote would help those who would be elected by an accurate, fair vote. As the people want something that you don't want, we cannot allow that. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
139
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 18:00:00 -
[175] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote: Also keep in mind that the purpose of the CSM elections to elect a council of representatives who can give CCP the best possible advice, and this is not exactly the same goal as in a RL election. Having multiple essentially identical voices on the CSM isn't optimal, which is likely one reason the CFC, who could have easily placed 2 or even 3 candidates into the top 7 in the last election, instead chose to concentrate their votes on a single candidate..
Ahh, here is the rub. You see, all people from the CFC are identical, ergo we can't allow that.
Why aren't all highsec candidates identical? Why shouldn't we be making sure only one highsec candidate gets elected? |
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1079
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 18:03:00 -
[176] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I asked why they felt it targeted the CFC in particular and not "whichever group in the game has the most organized power". In other words, if your worst nightmare came true and Kelduum metagamed EVE University into the largest, most organized player entity in the game, how would Trebor's proposal treat EVE Uni any different than the CFC? Fortunately, that would not happen, because it's only complete ignorance that gets Kelduum any votes. This term of his on the CSM has made that more than clear. The dude is ineffective and useless at his "job" on the CSM.
Caldari Militia |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
139
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 18:04:00 -
[177] - Quote
For example, I - as Goonswarm's CFO - have a huge amount of experience in everything industry and money related. The Mittani, as Goonswarm's CEO, has a huge amount of experience in 0.0 sovwar, diplomacy, and running a successful alliance. I know virtually nothing about the areas Mittani is an expert in, and he knows very little about the areas I am an expert in.
We are both in Goonswarm. Do we bring identical things to the table? Am I to be excluded, were I to run, because in your esteemed opinion I am a clone of The Mittani? |
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1080
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 18:05:00 -
[178] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:I'm glad this has sparked a lively discussion, and I hope it continues to evolve. To clarify one point, election reform is something the CSM has been discussing for years, and I have taken the point role in pushing the discussion forward (as was discussed at the May 2012 summit). You have taken the point role? Haha. Why you letting poor Hans take all the heat in this discussion thread then? By page three, people forgot you wrote the original post, since only Hans is "defending" it.
You wrote it, you defend it. Man up, and stop letting your CSM-mate take all the heat.
Caldari Militia |
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
662
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 18:06:00 -
[179] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I asked why they felt it targeted the CFC in particular and not "whichever group in the game has the most organized power". In other words, if your worst nightmare came true and Kelduum metagamed EVE University into the largest, most organized player entity in the game, how would Trebor's proposal treat EVE Uni any different than the CFC?
Your proposal would disenfranchise not only many CFC voters but also any alternative blocs that attempted to organize. You seem to think that the CFC being organized means no one else can be, when in fact you could see Eve-U, the HBC, the Solar Fleet bloc, the -A- bloc, and so on organizing and directing their votes, all at once. Your proposal cramps any and all effort to do this, not just ours. This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
fofofo |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9406
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 18:09:00 -
[180] - Quote
Come to think of it, the voting system isn't the actual problem.
The problem is that what we're voting for is undefined. The CSM is not a decision-making body, so proportionality doesn't matter. it may be a ranked body, but only the top and the bottom four(?) positions are of any relevance.
So what relevant factor is it the votes are supposed to decide? Before this is answered, there's no way to pick a matching voting system. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 34 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |