open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked Don't know who to vote for? Let the CSM Vote Match! website help you!
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic

Dierdra Vaal
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.03.08 14:17:00 - [1]
 

http://match.eve-csm.com/
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
[/url]


Hello everyone!

Like in previous years I'm running the CSM Vote Match! website. Vote Match! allows you to easily see which CSM candidates share your views and opinion, as well as allowing you to compare their points of view.

For those who've used this in the past you may be pleased to know candidates were now able to add explanations to their answers and many have used this opportunity! This should greatly increase the usefulness of their answers. Also, I've given the website slightly less terrible visuals.

You can get started here: http://match.eve-csm.com/step_2.php

The goal of Vote Match! is to provide an independant, unbiased platform that assists voters in making an informed choice. 45 Candidates have made a profile and are included in the matching process. 9 Candidates opted not to participate.

Note: my server isn't super beefy and the website can get quite heavy at times. Server Error 500's will probably happen occasionally due to the load. Sad

Dierdra Vaal
Vote Match! administrator

CCP Diagoras


C C P Alliance
Posted - 2011.03.08 14:26:00 - [2]
 

I think this needs to be stickified.

Hoya en Marland
Posted - 2011.03.08 14:33:00 - [3]
 

Wow, nice website!

None of CSM candidates shares more than 69% of my thoughts, though.

Serious Internet Politician
www.seriousinternetpolitician.com
Posted - 2011.03.08 14:35:00 - [4]
 

Nice work, good to see there are some more options this round and atleast someones vote website is working as intended :P


Dirk Decibel
Posted - 2011.03.08 15:58:00 - [5]
 

I've been waiting for this!

Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
Posted - 2011.03.08 16:23:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Hoya en Marland
Wow, nice website!

None of CSM candidates shares more than 69% of my thoughts, though.

They may, only maybe sometimes slightly more or less than you.

Also, some of the questions are asked in such a way that although one agrees with the underlying sentiment, if taken stricto sensu, the opposite answer had to be selected. Hence the comments.

At the end of the day, it's an indication, and you should check out the candidate's programs in more depth before making your choice.

Helen Highwater
GoonWaffe
Posted - 2011.03.08 16:45:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel

Also, some of the questions are asked in such a way that although one agrees with the underlying sentiment, if taken stricto sensu, the opposite answer had to be selected. Hence the comments.

At the end of the day, it's an indication, and you should check out the candidate's programs in more depth before making your choice.


This is worth repeating.

Two step
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2011.03.08 16:59:00 - [8]
 

I just wanted to thank Dierdra and any other folks that worked on the site, you guys did a good job. I did find some of the questions to be a bit odd, since folks could answer that several different areas were the highest priority, it seems like only once choice should have been allowed there.

Dierdra Vaal
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.03.08 17:03:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Two step
I just wanted to thank Dierdra and any other folks that worked on the site, you guys did a good job. I did find some of the questions to be a bit odd, since folks could answer that several different areas were the highest priority, it seems like only once choice should have been allowed there.


I understand what you're saying, but if a candidate wants to contradict himself by claiming two different areas are both the single most important thing in Eve, they can :)

Your Client
Posted - 2011.03.08 18:20:00 - [10]
 

on the "results page", Can you make it to where we can keep the questions in view while we scroll through the participants, i get lost having to drag side to side to see what candidates are for/against.

Dirk Decibel
Posted - 2011.03.08 18:27:00 - [11]
 

Well based on the votematch I can hardly make a wrong choice as I get at least 50% from every candidate it seems :D

Never seen that happen in RL politics. Cool

Your Client
Posted - 2011.03.08 18:29:00 - [12]
 

oh and can you implement a remove button, some of these people need to be filtered out from my screen.

Dierdra Vaal
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.03.08 18:54:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Your Client
oh and can you implement a remove button, some of these people need to be filtered out from my screen.


both your suggestions are good ones, unfortunately I dont really have time at the moment to do the website restructuring required to make them happen :/

Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
Posted - 2011.03.08 19:40:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Cearain on 08/03/2011 19:41:38
Edited by: Cearain on 08/03/2011 19:41:12
Originally by: Dierdra Vaal
Originally by: Two step
I just wanted to thank Dierdra and any other folks that worked on the site, you guys did a good job. I did find some of the questions to be a bit odd, since folks could answer that several different areas were the highest priority, it seems like only once choice should have been allowed there.


I understand what you're saying, but if a candidate wants to contradict himself by claiming two different areas are both the single most important thing in Eve, they can :)


It should just ahve a 1-5 scale. Something like "I tend to agree very strongly - 5" or "I tend to disagree strongly - 1". That way someone who for example thought faction war was extremely important but not "the most important thing ccp can work on" could give that a 4 instead of having to give it the equivalant of a 2 (disagree)

It's just awkward wording it the way you do.

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.08 20:39:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Weaselior on 08/03/2011 20:41:47
Originally by: CCP Diagoras
I think this needs to be stickified.


I'd like to object to this. As you can see through a cursory perusal of the questions asked, they're very slanted: I can determine nearly perfectly what the answer the author thought was correct is.

edit:
This is also significant in what questions were asked vs. not asked.

Joran Dravius
Amarr
Imperial Academy
Posted - 2011.03.08 21:54:00 - [16]
 

Awesome site.

Two step
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2011.03.08 22:14:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Dierdra Vaal
Originally by: Two step
I just wanted to thank Dierdra and any other folks that worked on the site, you guys did a good job. I did find some of the questions to be a bit odd, since folks could answer that several different areas were the highest priority, it seems like only once choice should have been allowed there.


I understand what you're saying, but if a candidate wants to contradict himself by claiming two different areas are both the single most important thing in Eve, they can :)


They can, and it will make them match higher, especially if most users agree with more than one choice.

Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
Posted - 2011.03.09 01:37:00 - [18]
 

Not all the candidates are on this.
Can candidates still get on this or is it closed?

Peter Powers
FinFleet
Raiden.
Posted - 2011.03.09 02:03:00 - [19]
 

Ahoy Dierdra,

you have send me an invite to your tool,
and i looked at it a few days ago.

Now while i'm sure that this did cost you quite a bit work, i will not add myself to it.

I don't want to suggest you would do such thing on purpose, since i know you put in alot work for the community, but the tool is just not neutral enough. The questions are mostly stuff that the eve blogger scene is posting about, and another large chunk is stuff from the forums here - while the contents of the campaigns of some candidates are not covered properly.

I feel no matter what i answer, the set of questions does not allow me to show why i want people to vote for me.

Also, when promoting such a tool, which should be neutral, you might want to rethink endorsing specific candidates in the bio of the character promoting it, otherwise it looks... strange.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2011.03.09 03:22:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Peter Powers
I don't want to suggest you would do such thing on purpose, since i know you put in alot work for the community, but the tool is just not neutral enough. The questions are mostly stuff that the eve blogger scene is posting about, and another large chunk is stuff from the forums here - while the contents of the campaigns of some candidates are not covered properly.


Perhaps new questions could be suggested?

All surveys are biased due to the nature of the beast. How you represent yourself through the survey is up to you. Note that Ripard Teg and Mike Azariah have commented extensively about their answers.

Some of the questions are obviously loaded, others are missing (nerf super carriers is missing, for example), it is up to the candidates to position themselves in the space mapped out by the survey. What non-drone compounds are there that factor in the resource generation of the game?

But I feel there are questions that are important which were not asked, and the slant of the questions tends to imply that people think the CSM has driving power, rather than a share of steering power.

Thank you Diedre for the site, warts and all :)

FlyingSpaghettiMonster
Posted - 2011.03.09 06:15:00 - [21]
 

Diedra- some comments.

I agree with the above posters that the questions with "highest priority" should be modified. Regardless of whether or not the CSM members themselves actually are somehow wanting multiple most important sections, a simple change to "high priority" instead of highest above and beyond all else will cause it to flow more. Also, it makes those answering want to modify their answers, so they make one higher than the other.



In the comparison page, could you please make the questions and your own answers on the left static (is that the word? Not a web designer.), while the candidates list can be scrolled, for easy comparison? Currently if I scroll the entire screen to far over to see the far right candidates, I lose seeing what question I am on and what my own answers were, so I have to keep scrolling back and forth to keep track.

Dierdra Vaal
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.03.09 10:42:00 - [22]
 

Edited by: Dierdra Vaal on 09/03/2011 10:46:56
The questions were worded as 'highest' in order to highlight the dilemma: if you have to choose one feature over another, would you? Because the CSM does affect the priority of development, and if the entire CSM tells CCP "we believe 0.0 is the single most important part of the game", that may well become reflected in the priority CCP gives to 0.0 development. It is important for voters to know which area of the game a candidate will most likely push for.

Originally by: Cearain
Not all the candidates are on this.
Can candidates still get on this or is it closed?


Some candidates (like peter powers) chose not to participate despite multiple evemails being sent to them. sign ups are now closed.

I disagree that I - as a pilot - should be completely neutral because I make this website: the website is transparent in its operation. Questions were simply chosen to be divisive and polarising, and focus on the most popular issues of the moment. This unfortunately means some people will feel misrepresented.

I also disagree that the questions are biased or leading: there is no 'right' or 'wrong' answer, just a statement you either agree or disagree with. And we see that all questions have people both agreeing and disagreeing with them. For anyone not happy with this website, you're welcome to make a better one yourself.

Killer Gandry
Caldari
Shadow of the Pain
Posted - 2011.03.09 11:31:00 - [23]
 

Thank you for this awesome tool.

I used it and then looked at what my personal keypoints were in regards to priorities and compare them with all CSM candidates.


Gehen Sealbreaker
Amarr
Posted - 2011.03.09 11:40:00 - [24]
 

Thank you for running this service again Dierdra :)

I read some players concerns about VoteMatch being rigged to influence their votes. I can confirm them that, as a candidate, the answers displayed on this website are those I entered, and were not tampered with in any way.

Freyya
Advanced Planetary Exports
Intergalactic Exports Group
Posted - 2011.03.09 12:01:00 - [25]
 

Thnx for this tool though i personally find its use limited. it does send me in the right direction somewhat but i'm missing the extended ideas from the candidates. It might be under the text balloon but the mouse over is not working for me though it does on the other mouse overs.

My main issue is that though i agree that the industry side of eve needs alot of love (especially the mining direction) it does not mean that's my main voting point. I do however end up with someone who is running almost completely on a "carebear" base. He might have issues concerning ship balance and 0.0 developments but i'm pretty limited in viewing their complete stance on things. i know i could go to their own portals/websites to read their extended views on things but it would be usefull to be able to get it from the tool itself. As said a more in depth answer on some issues could be under the balloon but that's not mousing over for me..dunno if i'm the only one (IE8.0.7600.16385)

The main thing i'm really feeling limited in is the extend of the questionaire. Sure i can agree that low sec needs development but in what way would my vote match with someone running, since he could have completely different ideas about fixing it than i do. Even though i might agree with him on the base level i might totally not agree with the way he wants to handle things.

Swynet
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.03.09 14:07:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: CCP Diagoras
I think this needs to be stickified.


Good Job.

Also @OP: Excellent job /bow

Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
Posted - 2011.03.09 15:25:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Dierdra Vaal
Some candidates (like peter powers) chose not to participate despite multiple evemails being sent to them. sign ups are now closed.


Why are they now closed?


Dracnys
Caldari
Posted - 2011.03.09 15:36:00 - [28]
 

Great job! Certainly helps me to filter all the candidates. However my vote won't just go to the person with the highest match (which is 76%) as I try not to vote someone who's terribly unlikely to make it to a seat anyway.

Dierdra Vaal
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.03.09 15:41:00 - [29]
 

I either allow candidates to fill in/change their profile, or allow users to vote match. If I were to do both, candidates could try to change their answers to tailor them to what they perceive are the answers most likely to give them high match percentages, as well as preventing me to get accurate metrics on the answers/matching after the elections (as data then may not necessarily be equal to the data during the election).

Candidates were given a week to fill in their profile and received a reminder mail on top of the initial evemail urging them to make their profile. Some have obviously chosen not to do this (which is entirely their call).

Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
Posted - 2011.03.09 16:09:00 - [30]
 

Edited by: Cearain on 09/03/2011 16:09:36
A week seems a short time. How do you know they even read the eve-mail?

Also my question is *why* is it now cut off. Not describe the cut off deadline. It seems pretty arbitrary.

Since it is clear at this point the Dierdra Vaal is not accepting all the candidates submissions, I would ask that it be unstickied. It's not fair that ccp stickies the views of some candidates and not others.

If all the candidates can contribute to this, and arbitrary deadlines that may have been enforced in a biased way, are not preventing anyone from submitting their views then I have no objection to the sticky.



Pages: [1] 2 3

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