Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 23 post(s) |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3968
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 13:51:00 -
[31] - Quote
Many thanks to the Community team, and especially CCP Veritas for his extra hours put into this, taking the time to make sure this is done in the best way possible. I'm looking forward to this election and seeing how this all plays out! Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
2626
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 13:52:00 -
[32] - Quote
PalkAn4ik wrote:I was trying to look it up and having no luck. What is the Big O notation you got for that algorithm?
In the worst case, you can expect that the cost is related to C(c,s) where C is the choose function: c!/(s! (c-s)!). c is the number of candidates, and s is the number of seats.
c(40,14), the case for the last election, means you have to compare 23,206,929,840 different possible quorums! Re-elect Trebor to CSM8 GÇó Member of CSM 5-7 GÇó My CSM Blog |
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
213
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 13:55:00 -
[33] - Quote
STV is prone to "Donkey" voting from players that are not in "alliances that help them fill the preferences" and/or don't know all the candidates.
Has the CCP think about this small issue? Will CCP show the candidates in a random order in the ballot?
The Lazy Pilot - http://thelazypilot.wordpress.com/ |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
607
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 13:59:00 -
[34] - Quote
Jassmin Joy wrote:Not sure if this should be asked somewhere else, but is there a specific reason for cms's needing to be over 21? Just one of those old rules that we're sticking to, or is there something i'm not getting at first glance?
The legal drinking age in Iceland is 20, and you need at least a year experience before you can face a CSM meeting. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3968
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 14:01:00 -
[35] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Will there be increased efforts to raise awareness of the CSM season this time, which in many people's eyes would be a far more important step for the CSM, and do a far better job of making the process legitimate, than fiddling with the voting system? Asking us to vote twice and to make 14 choices on the second occasion isn't exactly going to appeal to the apathetic Joe Random Eve Player.
This was my primary concern throughout our internal discussions, the fact that so much time was spent hashing out complicated algorithms for election results calculation and so little time spent discussing how we can promote the election and increase voter turnout. My fear (and we'll see if its founded or not) is that a more complicated voting system will decrease turnout, rather than the other way around.
While I'm glad that enough time was spent that a different, -supposedly- less-exploitable method was selected, we'll see if there's follow-through on the promotional/educational front. We've been told that there will be some more material released closer to the election start, but I'll believe it when I see it. We've asked previously for more promotional support for things like Town Halls and such and received less-than-satisfactory (or just plain tardy) response, so I can only go off of CCP's track record where this is concerned. I would have liked to have seen this been the big push this year instead of voting reform itself, personally. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
2626
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 14:05:00 -
[36] - Quote
Konrad Kane wrote:Will you have to stack rank all 14 candidates? That seems somewhat onerous, wouldn't be better to say you can select up to 14 people who may ore may not get your vote. Making the voting system harder work seems counter intuitive. STV requires you to choose your favorite candidates and then rank them. There are variants where you can give multiple candidates the same ranking; the case where all approved-of candidates are given the same rank is called Approval voting.
Approval voting is simpler, but because it does not provide information about relative preferences, it is not as good at generating a result that is a close approximation of the actual intent of the electorate. It is also more succeptible to tactical voting than STV.
Re-elect Trebor to CSM8 GÇó Member of CSM 5-7 GÇó My CSM Blog |
Sedilis
Lead Farmers Kill It With Fire
71
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 14:06:00 -
[37] - Quote
Finally an election system sufficiently complex for a game like Eve
Nice change CCP. |
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
2626
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 14:11:00 -
[38] - Quote
Unforgiven Storm wrote:STV is prone to "Donkey" voting from players that are not in "alliances that help them fill the preferences" and/or don't know all the candidates. Has the CCP think about this small issue? Will CCP show the candidates in a random order in the ballot? Donkey votes are just random noise in STV, as they were in the previous FPTP system. If you have pointers to any scholarly research that shows that random votes are a bigger problem in STV than in FPTP, please post them.
If the past is any guide, the candidates will appear on the ballot in a random order that changes each time someone tries to vote (so everyone will get a different, randomly ordered ballot). Re-elect Trebor to CSM8 GÇó Member of CSM 5-7 GÇó My CSM Blog |
|
CCP Xhagen
C C P C C P Alliance
347
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 14:20:00 -
[39] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Results are announced at Fanfest, which is a month later this year. Correct. We were thinking about having it not tied to Fanfest but we decided against it.
The thing that might be difficult for CSM8 is the relative short timeframe they have between being elected and going to the first summit. But that can be mitigated with information and hard work for the first few weeks. CCP Xhagen | Senior Researcher CSM Project Manager
|
|
|
CCP Xhagen
C C P C C P Alliance
347
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 14:23:00 -
[40] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Will there be increased efforts to raise awareness of the CSM season this time, which in many people's eyes would be a far more important step for the CSM, and do a far better job of making the process legitimate, than fiddling with the voting system? Asking us to vote twice and to make 14 choices on the second occasion isn't exactly going to appeal to the apathetic Joe Random Eve Player. We will be ramping up the messages regarding the CSM - we have video materials for a video devblog about the CSM, the email newsletters, login screen ads, the whole of the CSM websection is to work in the Ingame Browser so linking people in chat is no effort and more. CCP Xhagen | Senior Researcher CSM Project Manager
|
|
|
|
CCP Xhagen
C C P C C P Alliance
347
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 14:24:00 -
[41] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:Is it 14 votes exactly, or up to 14? If I only see 4 candidates I like the look of, do I have to cast the remaining 10 or can they be discarded? As far as I know, you'll be able to select any number from 1 to 14. You may be amused to learn that my position was that you should be able to rank all the candidates if you so desired. You will be able to select one, or two, or three, or four... up to 14. CCP Xhagen | Senior Researcher CSM Project Manager
|
|
|
CCP Xhagen
C C P C C P Alliance
347
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 14:29:00 -
[42] - Quote
RDevz wrote:Quote:The summit attendees will use a new 2+5 system, with CCP and the CSM working together to pick the 5 hardest working and most feature relevant CSMs being flown to each summit and the final 2 attendees will be the "most preferred" candidates, chosen by reentering the election results into an STV election to select the top 2 candidates. This is a system open to neither abuse nor gaming, with absolutely no chance of someone (you know who you are) trying to use it as a "keep the Goons out of the CSM" tool. On the flip side, we can then bring in some other people than the top seven instead of being locked in to that predetermined selection.
Granted we know this will generate discussions about the selection, but the flavor of it will be different from the discussions on the matter in the past. CCP Xhagen | Senior Researcher CSM Project Manager
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7738
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 14:37:00 -
[43] - Quote
Well done CCP for handing control of the CSM to the CFC and the HBC.
Don't say you weren't warned long ago.
Since I will directly benefit this time around I'm not even going to make too much of a fuss about it right now, but the outcome of this change is so obvious that I can't believe it isn't intended. That alone gives me much amusement. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7738
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 14:39:00 -
[44] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:I look forward to seeing how our team games the system this time around.
Why wait? 30 seconds thought reveals that you won't even have to try very hard. Just nominate the 7 candidates you like the most and tell your guys to vote for them in any order that pleases them. Bingo: CFC CSM achieved. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7738
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 14:41:00 -
[45] - Quote
Jackie Fisher wrote:This all looks simpler and more transparent than the previous system.
That would be one way to describe it. If by simpler you mean much more complex, and if by transparent, you mean transparently obvious that this will hand the result completely to large voting blocs. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7738
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 14:45:00 -
[46] - Quote
CCP Xhagen wrote:Trebor Daehdoow wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:Is it 14 votes exactly, or up to 14? If I only see 4 candidates I like the look of, do I have to cast the remaining 10 or can they be discarded? As far as I know, you'll be able to select any number from 1 to 14. You may be amused to learn that my position was that you should be able to rank all the candidates if you so desired. You will be able to select one, or two, or three, or four... up to 14.
And you don't see a possible problem with this handing more voting voice to organised, well informed (or well-directed) voting blocs?
Well OK then, carry on!
I mean suffering christ it's not like the "how can this possibly be exploited" test hasn't been mandatory for game design ideas for the last 9 years.
Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Indahmawar Fazmarai
1077
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 14:54:00 -
[47] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:Will there be increased efforts to raise awareness of the CSM season this time, which in many people's eyes would be a far more important step for the CSM, and do a far better job of making the process legitimate, than fiddling with the voting system? Asking us to vote twice and to make 14 choices on the second occasion isn't exactly going to appeal to the apathetic Joe Random Eve Player. This was my primary concern throughout our internal discussions, the fact that so much time was spent hashing out complicated algorithms for election results calculation and so little time spent discussing how we can promote the election and increase voter turnout. My fear (and we'll see if its founded or not) is that a more complicated voting system will decrease turnout, rather than the other way around. While I'm glad that enough time was spent that a different, -supposedly- less-exploitable method was selected, we'll see if there's follow-through on the promotional/educational front. We've been told that there will be some more material released closer to the election start, but I'll believe it when I see it. We've asked previously for more promotional support for things like Town Halls and such and received less-than-satisfactory (or just plain tardy) response, so I can only go off of CCP's track record where this is concerned. I would have liked to have seen this been the big push this year instead of voting reform itself, personally.
That's my concern too. They're adressing a minor issue with an overly complex solution that may make things worse.
Issues i can notice:
- Double voting (pre-election + election). It's confusing at least and will drive away the less involved voters (from an already minoritary pool of involved players who hardly can claim to speak for the other 86% who doesn't vote) - 28 candidates are too many people to really learn and weight their proposals. - players will not understand what happens with their votes because STV systems are too complex and uncommon - CSM being picked to travel to Iceland depending on how they are "feature relevant"? I hardly understood that part but what i get is that CCP will only invite CSM who talk about what CCP wants to discuss no matter what the players would like to see discussed. How are players supposed to forward an issue to CCP if CCP decides beforehand who's gonna go to Iceland based on what CCP wants to listen rather than what players want to say?
And all in all, representativeness and vote-farming would not be an issue if there was a lot of voters. It's the poor voter turnout what makes potentiallly easy to "rig" the elections with the manpower of a single alliance.
Players don't vote, that's the real matter with the CSM. EVE is Serious Business: You shall not feel entitled to being allowed to play EVE just because you are paying it. |
|
CCP Xhagen
C C P C C P Alliance
347
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 14:58:00 -
[48] - Quote
Jackie Fisher wrote:This all looks simpler and more transparent than the previous system. Sadly transparency and simplicity are often mutually exclusive. CCP Xhagen | Senior Researcher CSM Project Manager
|
|
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
3326
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 15:11:00 -
[49] - Quote
I wrote a blog post about what this means for wormhole candidates. It is critical to make sure that all candidates ask their supporters to list *all* wormhole candidates at the top of their ballots. CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7741
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 15:15:00 -
[50] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Many thanks to the Community team, and especially CCP Veritas for his extra hours put into this, taking the time to make sure this is done in the best way possible. I'm looking forward to this election and seeing how this all plays out!
Delicately phrased. I approve. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7744
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 15:16:00 -
[51] - Quote
Two step wrote:I wrote a blog post about what this means for wormhole candidates. It is critical to make sure that all candidates ask their supporters to list *all* wormhole candidates at the top of their ballots.
Silly Two Step, this change is meant to prevent voting blocs from gaining more influence!
*stifled laughter* Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
5n4keyes
Sacred Templars Unclaimed.
58
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 15:26:00 -
[52] - Quote
Single Transferable Vote is kinda a terrible system, hell we voted no to use it in the elections here in the UK.
I can now basically give votes to the candidate I want, and then everyone else who I think wont get votes. Basically, wormhole guys, welcome to CSM8, as most of us will waste the extra points on you guys, rather than voting for 'the other side'. and using you as a blocking tool.
Well done CCP! |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
842
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 15:36:00 -
[53] - Quote
I hearby name this new system
Survivor in Space Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Cabal Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve. |
Halgar Rench
EVE University Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 15:37:00 -
[54] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:Will there be increased efforts to raise awareness of the CSM season this time, which in many people's eyes would be a far more important step for the CSM, and do a far better job of making the process legitimate, than fiddling with the voting system? Asking us to vote twice and to make 14 choices on the second occasion isn't exactly going to appeal to the apathetic Joe Random Eve Player. This was my primary concern throughout our internal discussions, the fact that so much time was spent hashing out complicated algorithms for election results calculation and so little time spent discussing how we can promote the election and increase voter turnout. My fear (and we'll see if its founded or not) is that a more complicated voting system will decrease turnout, rather than the other way around. While I'm glad that enough time was spent that a different, -supposedly- less-exploitable method was selected, we'll see if there's follow-through on the promotional/educational front. We've been told that there will be some more material released closer to the election start, but I'll believe it when I see it. We've asked previously for more promotional support for things like Town Halls and such and received less-than-satisfactory (or just plain tardy) response, so I can only go off of CCP's track record where this is concerned. I would have liked to have seen this been the big push this year instead of voting reform itself, personally.
I agree, the election deserves heavy promotion. And it doesn't need all need to be in serious-mode. I posted the following on the Features and Ideas forum.
[Suggestion] Incentivize CSM voting using fun game nonsense
To encourage voter participation, I'd like to suggest that CCP reward those who actually vote some kind of "Election Ammo" that could be used with the festival launchers.
Something like a shower of colorful balloons, or confetti, or streamers... This could heighten awareness of the 2-week voting period and maybe wake up some of the apathetic or unaware crowd.
Also, during the pre-election perhaps CCP could give every account a stack "Leaflet Ammo" that would fire a barrage of pamphlets and flyers from the Festival Launcher. Again, the spread the word that the voting period is coming up soon.
|
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
360
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 15:51:00 -
[55] - Quote
Encouraging voting for the sake of voting is about as dumb as arranging a system that will land the entire CSM into the lap of one group. bring back images |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7745
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 15:56:00 -
[56] - Quote
Dramaticus wrote:Encouraging voting for the sake of voting is about as dumb as arranging a system that will land the entire CSM into the lap of one group.
Let the results do the talking. Meanwhile, go long on popcorn. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Sgurd Battersea
Lumodynamics Power Control Corp Panda Cave
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 16:01:00 -
[57] - Quote
wow. FPTP clearly wasn't thought through properly.
FPTP Bad for democracy
voting for up to 14 people will be ridiculous. its like having a scoring system that goes up to 1000. how would you accurately define something as 342/1000 and not 343/1000?
people prefer simple systems. going up to 5 would be better.
i would suggest a Two-round system with instead of just marking an "X" in the box it would be a choice of preference from 1 to 5. determining the winners of each round would be done with a Alternative vote to eliminate half of the candidates.
Suggestions on this welcome |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
360
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 16:03:00 -
[58] - Quote
Voting Change for the Sake of Change. The hallmark of the do-nothing CSM. bring back images |
|
CCP Veritas
C C P C C P Alliance
695
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 16:05:00 -
[59] - Quote
Sgurd Battersea wrote:going up to 5 would be better. People are free to only put in 5 if they wish. Heck, they can only vote for one if that's all the preference they have. The only downside is that they might disenfranchise themselves if noone in their small set of candidates end up having enough support. CCP Veritas - Senior Programmer - EVE Software |
|
Sgurd Battersea
Lumodynamics Power Control Corp Panda Cave
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 16:09:00 -
[60] - Quote
CCP Veritas wrote:Sgurd Battersea wrote:going up to 5 would be better. People are free to only put in 5 if they wish. Heck, they can only vote for one if that's all the preference they have. The only downside is that they might disenfranchise themselves if noone in their small set of candidates end up having enough support.
precisely. the choice is left to the voters and not to a flawed system that might not represent a large percentage of the voters.
a two-round system in my view is a better way to go |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |