open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked CSM candidates run on a platform
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Nypheas Azurai
Posted - 2011.03.03 10:58:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Nypheas Azurai on 03/03/2011 11:00:14

Not on a demographic identity. Why would CCP go out of its way to introduce non-platform bias?
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=866

Originally by: CCP

Of the accepted applications:

* 56 candidates are male and one is female.
* The oldest candidate will be 54 and 5 months old as of April 6th, 2011. The youngest will be 22 years and 3 months. The average candidate age will be 32 years and 6 months.
* Candidates from 12 different countries are running.
* Four candidates are former full CSM members. Two are former alternates.
* There are candidates from 35 different alliances.
* 12 candidates are not in an alliance.



Less than half of those things on that list are relevant to CSM candidacy.

Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
Posted - 2011.03.03 11:06:00 - [2]
 

Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
Edited by: Nypheas Azurai on 03/03/2011 11:00:14

Not on a demographic identity. Why would CCP go out of its way to introduce non-platform bias?
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=866

Originally by: CCP

Of the accepted applications:

* 56 candidates are male and one is female.
* The oldest candidate will be 54 and 5 months old as of April 6th, 2011. The youngest will be 22 years and 3 months. The average candidate age will be 32 years and 6 months.
* Candidates from 12 different countries are running.
* Four candidates are former full CSM members. Two are former alternates.
* There are candidates from 35 different alliances.
* 12 candidates are not in an alliance.



Less than half of those things on that list are relevant to CSM candidacy.


Because it's difficult to give stats on platforms.

Also, since most of the time spent in meetings is spent talking about things that are not a part of your "platform", as such you want to elect people who have well rounded knowledge of all things, not people who know just the one thing and stay silent the rest of the time, or spout nonsense. And how do you assess that?

Meissa Anunthiel, CSM 2, 3, 4, 5.

Nypheas Azurai
Posted - 2011.03.03 11:42:00 - [3]
 

You don't assess it through irrelevant demographics.
Ask yourself how each of those points impacts on "knowing things". Then ask yourself which ones even relate to "knowledge" of the game.

For good measure, why not help CCP complete the list and give them your height, weight, and sexual orientation.

Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
Posted - 2011.03.03 11:47:00 - [4]
 

How do those interesting statistics bias me towards any candidate(s) exactly?

Nypheas Azurai
Posted - 2011.03.03 11:58:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: Nypheas Azurai on 03/03/2011 12:03:40

Originally by: Crumplecorn
How do those interesting statistics bias me towards any candidate(s) exactly?

The same way if for example they announced that one candidate was a black trans-gendered midget: it may not bias you at all, or it may completely. But no body holding an election in good taste freely volunteers demographics which have no other potential than to at worst introduce bias and at best be completely irrelevant. Those sorts of things are left to the media.

Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
Posted - 2011.03.03 12:02:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
The same way if you knew one candidate was a black trans-gendered midget: perhaps ot at all, or perhaps completely.
How can it bias me if I don't know which one is a midget?

Nypheas Azurai
Posted - 2011.03.03 12:08:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Crumplecorn
How can it bias me if I don't know which one is a midget?

How does it bias you if you knew the average candidate height? or the average weight? In any case it's in bad taste to include such irrelevant information in a candidacy announcement as if it were relevant. Things you include during an announcement of candidates: perhaps even a word or two about their platform. Things you don't include: their hair colour.

Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
Posted - 2011.03.03 12:09:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
How does it bias you if you knew the average candidate height? or the average weight?
Yes, this is basically what I am asking.

Nypheas Azurai
Posted - 2011.03.03 12:17:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: Nypheas Azurai on 03/03/2011 12:20:19

I'm not saying it does. Conversely ask yourself how does knowing that one of the candidates is blonde impact your vote? And so why should such information be included in an announcement of their candidacy.

Picture any form of governing body issuing a similar announcement that summarized candidates in an upcoming (supposedly democratic) election by their race and sexual orientation. Is it interesting to know? yes. Does it belong in an election that hopes to be taken with any degree of seriousness or good taste? No. And maybe that's telling of CSM elections.

Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
Posted - 2011.03.03 12:21:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
I'm not saying it does.
That is exactly what you said.

And if it doesn't bias you, which you now concede it doesn't, there is no harm in including it. And unlike the facetious attributes you have used as examples, the statistics CCP supplied are interesting. In fact the distributions of gender, age and to a lesser degree country of the playerbase in general are discussed on the forum from time to time.

So what we appear to have here, is the release of some completely harmless and relatively interesting statistics, and another random stab at the validity of the CSM election process.

Nypheas Azurai
Posted - 2011.03.03 12:56:00 - [11]
 

Where I said it biased you is completely an artifact of your reading comprehension.

Like the attributes I listed, yes the statistics are interesting, but like the attributes I listed, are also irrelevant and in bad form for an announcement on candidacy.

To take your poor example, among many distributions of EVE's playerbase, another no-doubt "interesting" one (and also often discussed) is weight, yet having the average weight of the candidates listed is clearly to be avoided despite its interest value. A player's race is also of high interest on the forums that often discuss reasons for bloodline selection, yet listing the average race of candidacy, another obvious no-no.

If you don't understand or see the problem, then hopefully you are alone in that. Otherwise I submit that is exactly why "stabs" can be taken at this process, because when you release announcements such as that for supposedly democratic processes, you are playing with knives.

Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
Posted - 2011.03.03 13:03:00 - [12]
 

Edited by: Crumplecorn on 03/03/2011 13:04:29
Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
To take your poor example, among many distributions of EVE's playerbase, another no-doubt "interesting" one (and also often discussed) is weight, yet having the average weight of the candidates listed is clearly to be avoided despite its interest value. A player's race is also of high interest on the forums that often discuss reasons for bloodline selection, yet listing the average race of candidacy, another obvious no-no.
So on top of managing to release statistics which are interesting but which are unable to cause bias, CCP have also successfully avoided others which would by their very nature be taken poorly.

Seems like they were really on the ball with this one.


Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
when you release announcements such as that for supposedly democratic processes, you are playing with knives.
Apparently not, given how fast you are back-pedalling on the bias issue.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.03.03 13:10:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
yes the statistics are interesting, but like the attributes I listed, are also irrelevant and in bad form for an announcement on candidacy.
Why are they bad form?
What statistics would you have wanted to see instead?
Quote:
If you don't understand or see the problem,
So what is the problem?

All I see is a list of demographics that suggest that the CSM candidates seem to present a fair cross-section of the EVE population at large, and in particular a good representation of those who are at all interested in the CSM process. How is this bad?

Nypheas Azurai
Posted - 2011.03.03 13:16:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Nypheas Azurai on 03/03/2011 13:19:06

And if they had 57 male candidates, from a single country and age, what then? Or if one candidate was trans-gendered would they then have listed that too? Or perhaps N/A.

It's not the kind of information you include. Especially when in lieu of any real pertinent information (such as platform statements) it is made to seem the primary focus. It debases the entire process, and in CCP's effort to brag about their diversity at a completely inappropriate time, they've only shot themselves, and the validity of CSM, in the foot.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.03.03 13:16:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
Why would CCP go out of its way to introduce non-platform bias?
[demographics statistics]
Less than half of those things on that list are relevant to CSM candidacy.

Begeezuseffinkrist, lighten up, you nimrod.
Those statistics are indeed NOT relevant to CSM candidacy, and just because they are wholly irrelevant to it, there is no non-platform bias in presenting them to the general public.
People don't vote for a CSM candidate because he's young or old or a certain race out of game, they vote because he's popular as a character or champions some cause the voter cares about.
It does not hurt anybody that runs for CSM to have demographic statistics of the many candidates posted, but it does help enlighten regular users as to how serious the whole CSM schick is for the general player population by having a relatively high (for a game) age-based stats on candidates.
So shut your trap hole and find something SERIOUSLY BAD to complain about. This one is nowhere near even remotely bad.

Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
Posted - 2011.03.03 13:26:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
And if they had 57 male candidates, from a single country and age, what then?
Then I think it would be really, really hard to be biased based on their gender, age or country. Neutral

Nypheas Azurai
Posted - 2011.03.03 13:31:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Tippia
All I see is a list of demographics that suggest that the CSM candidates seem to present a fair cross-section of the EVE population at large, and in particular a good representation of those who are at all interested in the CSM process. How is this bad?


Does any democratic agency, for example, the US government, proceed an announcement on elections with a report on how many blacks and hispanics versus anglo's are running for office? Does it report the average age of the candidates? Does it see fit as a talking agenda the sexual orientation of its candidates?

Yet these are all interesting statistics that show the cross-section of the population it governs. And likewise this information is often made known through *proper* outlets at the appropriate time (either media, or separate announcements) and *not* during candidacy announcements, especially at the lack of any pertinent and relevant information to their candidacy.

Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
Posted - 2011.03.03 13:39:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
Does any democratic agency, for example, the US government, proceed an announcement on elections with a report on how many blacks and hispanics versus anglo's are running for office? Does it report the average age of the candidates? Does it see fit as a talking agenda the sexual orientation of its candidates?
You are comparing a video game company to a government. See below for one reason why this doesn't hold.

Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
And likewise this information is often made known through *proper* outlets
And who, exactly, is going to have these statistics other than CCP?

If you intend to say that CCP themselves should do it another time, don't bother. Nonsense.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.03.03 13:48:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 03/03/2011 13:49:21
Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
Does any democratic agency, for example, the US government, proceed an announcement on elections with a report on how many blacks and hispanics versus anglo's are running for office?

Yes. Maybe indirectly, but yes.
Quote:
Does it report the average age of the candidates?

Still sort of yes.
Quote:
Does it see fit as a talking agenda the sexual orientation of its candidates?

Not usually, but yes, it happens.


In a RL election, you already have ALL the demographic data you could possibly want available to you. You KNOW the real name and can obtain pictures of all candidates, and any personal information about each of them is more or less freely available.
This is not the case with EVE candidates, which are usually anonymous up until candidacy time.

Nypheas Azurai
Posted - 2011.03.03 13:52:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: Nypheas Azurai on 03/03/2011 13:53:52

Originally by: Crumplecorn
If you intend to say that CCP themselves should do it another time, don't bother. Nonsense.

And if you intend to imply gender, age, and nationality - and primarily that information - belong in an announcement on candidacy, don't bother, you've already shown why the validity of CSM is continually questioned.

Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
Posted - 2011.03.03 13:57:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
Herfa durfa durfa
I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of you trying to ignore my counterpoint to your last post.

Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.03 15:19:00 - [22]
 

How many run on pro-botting and how many anti-botting candidates are there?

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.03.03 15:25:00 - [23]
 

I would soooo totally run on a "make botting LEGAL and supported via client hooks" platform !!!!111oneone

CCP Adida


C C P
C C P Alliance
Posted - 2011.03.03 15:26:00 - [24]
 

Moved from General Discussion

Lady Cazana
Posted - 2011.03.03 15:37:00 - [25]
 

I dont see the harm in them doing this, they havnt pointed out who is what in it, tho it probably wouldnt be to hard to figure out after having the information. It shows us that the CSM candidates vary greatly from all different aspects, and that eve still has a handful of women per region. The part that 35 are from diffferent alliances and 12 are not in an alliance is an interesting and useful fact for us to know... The age of the candidates is possibly the only thing that could have been excluded, as some might go " whut, an old fart, screw that he dont know what we want" But if anyone is actually paying attention to the CSM candidates they would know thier ages anyway, regardless of if CCP made the post or not. It's not like csm candidates stay hidden in a brown paper bag the entire election until we vote then winners pop out and we burn the rest

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.03.03 15:42:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
Does any democratic agency, for example, the US government, proceed an announcement on elections with a report on how many blacks and hispanics versus anglo's are running for office? Does it report the average age of the candidates?
Yes, because there is an assumption that a political body that demographically correlates with the demographics of the voters will be represent the people better, and because any significant disconnects between the two indicates that there are structural prejudices or just outright discrimination at work that keep certain groups from being heard.

…and that's long before we get into the politics these political players represent (after which this debate comes back: why is it that political view X is so strongly supported by group A and shunned by category B? why does not party Z let type F citizens rise to top positions? etc etc etc).
Quote:
Does it see fit as a talking agenda the sexual orientation of its candidates?
No, but that's mainly because sex is a taboo subject in US politics. Or actually… yes, exactly because sex is a taboo subject. It's just not "debated" so much as gossiped about.

Nypheas Azurai
Posted - 2011.03.03 15:57:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Yes, because there is an assumption that a political body that demographically correlates with the demographics of the voters will be represent the people better

You will be hard-pressed to find any announcement of candidacy from a governing body about it's candidates individual or aggregate gender, age, or nationality. Secondly, you will be light-pressed to find in those same governing bodies that the candidates quite often do not match the demographics of the voters (but that is neither here nor there).

Likewise sexual orientation isn't mentioned not because it's taboo (and it is and it isn't), but rather because it has no place in an announcement about candidates running for an office.

No, candidates aren't hidden, you'll see and come to know them, but if and when their personal characteristics and demographics are detailed it will be by them or a disinterested party, and certainly *not* in conjunction with an official announcement on their candidacy. It's bad form, and the wrong kind of emphasis to place on the CSM election process.

Lady Cazana
Posted - 2011.03.03 16:07:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
Originally by: Tippia
Yes, because there is an assumption that a political body that demographically correlates with the demographics of the voters will be represent the people better

You will be hard-pressed to find any announcement of candidacy from a governing body about it's candidates individual or aggregate gender, age, or nationality. Secondly, you will be light-pressed to find in those same governing bodies that the candidates quite often do not match the demographics of the voters (but that is neither here nor there).

Likewise sexual orientation isn't mentioned not because it's taboo (and it is and it isn't), but rather because it has no place in an announcement about candidates running for an office.

No, candidates aren't hidden, you'll see and come to know them, but if and when their personal characteristics and demographics are detailed it will be by them or a disinterested party, and certainly *not* in conjunction with an official announcement on their candidacy. It's bad form, and the wrong kind of emphasis to place on the CSM election process.


I understand where you coming from tho a bit, it is bad form on ccp part to be doing the info giving as they had. Something like Eon magazine published by one of thier writers and not quoted by ccp is somewhere that should belong, ccp would be like the government body and Eon fox news.. and the gov shouldnt do that as u said, even if it doesnt do harm when the info already out there

Halaxi
Caldari
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.03.03 16:08:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Nypheas Azurai

Does any democratic agency, for example, the US government, proceed an announcement on elections with a report on how many blacks and hispanics versus anglo's are running for office? Does it report the average age of the candidates? Does it see fit as a talking agenda the sexual orientation of its candidates?

Yet these are all interesting statistics that show the cross-section of the population it governs. And likewise this information is often made known through *proper* outlets at the appropriate time (either media, or separate announcements) and *not* during candidacy announcements, especially at the lack of any pertinent and relevant information to their candidacy.


At the risk of further feeding the troll...

Most governments do not release personal information on this nature thru official channels, because as they are very much in the limelight, due to being political figures, all that stuff is known about them anyway, due to the media fulfiling the public intrest. So yes, in The Real World, we already know the age/ethnicity/gender/etc of candidates.

Why does the public want to know this? because they want to know all they can about the person who is going to be representing them to their Government.

Now, on to the CSM statistics. You are saying that the release of these statistics is innapropriate/incites bias/improper/etc. Please answer the question below:

"Can you give me an example of one CSM6 candidate who has had information specifically about their gender/age/ethnicity/sexual orientation/etc released to you by CCP?"

I'm willing to bet that you will be unable to find any instance of this being the case. Therefore, I put to you, that the release of these annonymous statistics, will have zero bearing on who I may vote for, as they impart no information on specific candidates. In fact, all they do, is provide a brief illustrative statistical insight into the demographic of the CSM6 candidates.

To close, you are making an issue out of something that is patently inconsequencial.

Hal.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.03.03 16:34:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Nypheas Azurai
You will be hard-pressed to find any announcement of candidacy from a governing body about it's candidates individual or aggregate gender, age, or nationality.
Not really, no.
If they don't do it, the watchdog groups will, and more and more agencies have come to understand that it's in their own interest to be the first on the ball and control the narrative.
Quote:
Secondly, you will be light-pressed to find in those same governing bodies that the candidates quite often do not match the demographics of the voters.
…which is why people keep compiling those aggregates: to demonstrate that there are inherent biases in the selection system. And if there weren't, people would compile the aggregates to show this fact and pat themselves on the back over it instead.

What CCP has done is to indicate that this isn't (so much) the case for the CSM.
Quote:
It's bad form
Again: why?


Pages: [1] 2

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only