open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked CSM6 - Voting statistics (regular updates!)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic

Seleene
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.03.16 10:08:00 - [31]
 

I want to see 50k votes. Very Happy

Gehen Sealbreaker
Amarr
Posted - 2011.03.16 10:37:00 - [32]
 

While campaigning time and CSM term are not too long in my mind, I agree that we should get more time between the publication of the candidate's list and actual voting start.
This would give more time to develop campaign messages and answer to questions before the first votes are cast. Also, it'd be interesting to see less biased EVE-related media.

Knug LiDi
N00bFleeT
Posted - 2011.03.16 19:32:00 - [33]
 

Edited by: Knug LiDi on 16/03/2011 19:35:19
I find it odd, in this game of internet spaceships, in this age of digital voting, that real world municipal governments can be elected from millions of folks (and at higher participation rates) in a single day and yet the CSM needs to have a much longer voting period.

I suspect that many in EVE have more involvement with what the CSM does, than what their municipal politicians do for them.

Shorten the vote period. Either you are interested or you are not. 0.5% of the electorate per day is not a useful extension.

C'mon people, vote already !


Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.17 02:12:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Knug LiDi
Shorten the vote period. Either you are interested or you are not. 0.5% of the electorate per day is not a useful extension.

EVE is not like real life, where time passes equally for everyone. Some people play all day every day, while others play a few hours a week (say, on weekends).

Thus a longer voting period is needed to give everyone an equal chance to vote. Reducing the voting period would favor organized in-game groups that can quickly get out their vote in a disciplined manner.

The current 2-week voting period is convenient for those players who just want to set aside an hour or two to do the research, make their choices, and vote.

Really, what we have here is a 3+ week campaign with voting open during the last 2 weeks. I don't think that is excessive (and it was cut down from 4+ weeks (2+2) in the previous election).

Extreme
Eye of God
Intergalactic Exports Group
Posted - 2011.03.17 08:48:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Originally by: Knug LiDi
Shorten the vote period. Either you are interested or you are not. 0.5% of the electorate per day is not a useful extension.

EVE is not like real life, where time passes equally for everyone. Some people play all day every day, while others play a few hours a week (say, on weekends).

Thus a longer voting period is needed to give everyone an equal chance to vote. Reducing the voting period would favor organized in-game groups that can quickly get out their vote in a disciplined manner.

The current 2-week voting period is convenient for those players who just want to set aside an hour or two to do the research, make their choices, and vote.

Really, what we have here is a 3+ week campaign with voting open during the last 2 weeks. I don't think that is excessive (and it was cut down from 4+ weeks (2+2) in the previous election).


Campaigning is a 7 days a week job and i do have a life.

Treb, you probably like the campaigning stuff in extension of your passion of being CSM.

I personally like to spend less time in campaigning as i really dislike it.
Campaigning is about politics while the CSM itself is actually a taskforce.
Politics is about lawmaking, we don't make the laws, CCP does!

Quote:
Thus a longer voting period is needed to give everyone an equal chance to vote. Reducing the voting period would favor organized in-game groups that can quickly get out their vote in a disciplined manner.


If CCP can make voting possible through Eve-Gate then there's no more need for a 2 week period, 10 days will do (where 2 weekends includes)

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.17 09:23:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: Extreme
If CCP can make voting possible through Eve-Gate then there's no more need for a 2 week period, 10 days will do (where 2 weekends includes)

A reduction to 10 days as you suggest is certainly worth considering. But I wonder if perhaps it might favor incumbents, by giving new candidates less time in which to interact with the voters and become defined in their minds.

One thing that might be done in the aftermath of the election would be to survey all of the candidates about their experiences and get their opinions on how the campaign process might be improved. I would certainly support this.

Finally, I understand your concerns about the time it takes to campaign, but keep in mind -- you are running for a volunteer job that, if you are elected, is going to soak up at least 1-2 hours a day of your time, probably more. The campaign is just a taste of what is ahead for the "lucky" winners! Twisted Evil

Diana Araquez
Caldari
Posted - 2011.03.17 17:30:00 - [37]
 

Shortening the voting period when the turnout is barely 10-15% is a horrible ideea.
That "0.5% each day" is actually around 2000 people or 10%-ish extra vote casts which is likely enough to get one person into the CSM.

If you're so busy in real life you can't wait for 1 more week and likely another 10000 extra votes maybe you shouldn't have signed up for the CSM in the first place.

Raid'En
Posted - 2011.03.17 19:03:00 - [38]
 

people have reported than some names have been removed for the choice... and it seems it's true for at least one, what does that means ?

Extreme
Eye of God
Intergalactic Exports Group
Posted - 2011.03.17 19:47:00 - [39]
 

Edited by: Extreme on 17/03/2011 19:47:32
Originally by: Diana Araquez
Shortening the voting period when the turnout is barely 10-15% is a horrible ideea.
That "0.5% each day" is actually around 2000 people or 10%-ish extra vote casts which is likely enough to get one person into the CSM.

If you're so busy in real life you can't wait for 1 more week and likely another 10000 extra votes maybe you shouldn't have signed up for the CSM in the first place.




1.
You are jumping into conclusions too fast as voting started ~ march 11th.
Lets see how many votes there will be casted after sunday the 20th (day 10)

2.
CSM requires around 16hrs a week while campaigning will cost you every minute of the day possible.

The Mittani
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.17 23:20:00 - [40]
 

an election with 50k+ votes involved is a serious commitment, you shouldn't try to run 'yourself' anymore than a local elected official does. you need volunteers, staffers and a war room, ideally.

it's the serious footslogging in the last week where your gotv efforts and organization pull you ahead of the pack who are trying to run solo and burning to a crisp.

Extreme
Eye of God
Intergalactic Exports Group
Posted - 2011.03.17 23:58:00 - [41]
 

Edited by: Extreme on 18/03/2011 00:17:38

i plead for a different way of elections for next year:

I like to see a new setup:

4 CSM candidates get into CSM by players votes

3 CSM candidates will get into CSM by 'Jury' (CCP), based on any criteria that the Jury may have.

2 CSM members of the current running CSM can get pushed forward by the other councillors (internal vote) for continuation purposes. (rule: The CSM members that made use of this option cannot make use of this option twice in a row)


* more guarantee on quality of CSM
* less chance on 'CSM blocks'
* improved continuation

* not everyone with the best skills and plans are capable running campaign as it should or lack campaigning skills.
Pick by Jury will be fair for this group of candidates.

Pirokobo
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.18 03:41:00 - [42]
 

Edited by: Pirokobo on 18/03/2011 03:59:35
Originally by: Extreme
* more guarantee on quality of CSM

This is an appeal to sentiment, it does not logically follow that your proposal will have any impact on the "quality" of a body of people, which is arbitrary scalar which varies based on perspective.

Quote:
* less chance on 'CSM blocks'

Unlike your previous point which was merely fallacious and naive, this time you're simply dead wrong and exhibit a sad, almost hilarious ineptitude at hard math.

If the blocs control the majority of the seats to begin with, then the CSM will pick members of the bloc to continue into the next csm. Then, the bloc electorate only needs to outnumber the rest of eve with four election seats instead of nine. The smaller the number of seats up for grabs gets, the stronger the bloc advantage becomes. The NC has tens of thousands of accounts, all or most of whom are highly invested in the outcome of the election. The DRF has the same.

Quote:
* improved continuation

This one barely even merits remark, you say something will be improved but fail to exhibit why that is important or what impact it will have on the body's ability to perform its function.



Far from accomplishing your unstated goal of unseating the blocs for all time, if your plan was put into effect, you would be handing us six seats, with CCP picking the last three.

Good job.

The blocs cannot completely muscle out empire in a nine seat election. But in a four seat election, the advantages of organized campaigns and organized vote allocation is too much for the random empire pubbie to compete with.

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.18 10:28:00 - [43]
 

With respect to changes in the voting procedure, it might be interesting to consider some sort of alternate-vote system that lets people vote for more than one candidate (there are many such systems). This would permit people to support candidates whom they liked, but would not otherwise vote for because they think they can't get elected.

However, before such a system is implemented, it should be extensively debated to ensure that it would be difficult to game by large voting blocs. And it should be noted that whatever its flaws, the current system does have the virtue of simplicity.

Pirokobo
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.18 11:22:00 - [44]
 

Edited by: Pirokobo on 18/03/2011 11:26:05
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
With respect to changes in the voting procedure, it might be interesting to consider some sort of alternate-vote system that lets people vote for more than one candidate (there are many such systems). This would permit people to support candidates whom they liked, but would not otherwise vote for because they think they can't get elected.

However, before such a system is implemented, it should be extensively debated to ensure that it would be difficult to game by large voting blocs. And it should be noted that whatever its flaws, the current system does have the virtue of simplicity.


Mmmmmm no, no debate is necessary I can shoot that one down too.

What you empire pubbies don't seem to get is that there are more motivated voters in blocs then there are outside. If you multiply everyone's votes, you multiply the number of votes for blocs. I was forced to choose between one or two of the three (Vile, Mittens, or Tree). If I had multiple votes to play with beyond just buying more accounts, I wouldn't have to choose.

As I pointed out, and as the results will show, there are simply more voters on the bloc side. Multiply our ballots, and the effect of coordinated campaigning becomes even more powerful. Reduce the number of seats, and the same thing happens.


Get it through your thick and remarkably shiny forehead: the current system is the *most* fair system to assure we don't sweep you completely.

Dirk Decibel
Posted - 2011.03.18 11:49:00 - [45]
 

The 'problem' of the low percentage of voters is also caused by the almost hidden nature of the elections. If you don't pay attention to the news or forums chances are you are unaware of there being such a thing as elections at all.

At minimum, there should be large posters across ur screen when loggin in during election time. And the CSM page on the EVE-O website? Imagine yourself a noob, curious about the CSM and visit the CSM section of this page right now. I doubt you will be a lot wiser after visiting...

The most recent meeting minutes are from almost a year ago, if there wasn't an election going on right now any uninformed visitor to the CSM section of this website would think it was dead Laughing

If you wan't the masses to be interested, all this has to change.

Extreme
Eye of God
Intergalactic Exports Group
Posted - 2011.03.18 12:12:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Pirokobo


Mmmmmm no, no debate is necessary I can shoot that one down too.




Your notes have been taken.


@ Treb, my vote model seems the right thing to do.

This isn't about choosing a government, this is about getting a task force together.

Even in many tv shows you have a hybrid way to pick people
1. tele-voting and 2. jury.
Where the people televote for any reason on candidates (charisma, talent, looks. popularity) while a (professional) jury picks out candidates based on a professional point of view.

If you don't like the idea that CCP handpick's 3 candidates then an alternative way can be that they will cast a number of votes on 3 candidates based on a percentage of the total votes.

Also don't forget that the alternate CSM's will still be the ones based on vote counts.

Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.03.18 12:14:00 - [47]
 

Edited by: Mynxee on 18/03/2011 12:24:50
Originally by: Dirk Decibel
At minimum, there should be large posters across ur screen when loggin in during election time. ...

The most recent meeting minutes are from almost a year ago, if there wasn't an election going on right now any uninformed visitor to the CSM section of this website would think it was dead Laughing

If you wan't the masses to be interested, all this has to change.


Dirk, there have been CSM "vote" posters on the login screen and on the EVE O website since the polls opened. As well, CCP sent out a "CSM" newsletter with links to all the information you're suggesting. CSM5 and CCP discussed ideas for this stuff well in advance of the CSM6 elections and CCP deserves a lot of credit for the increased exposure they've given the CSM6 elections.

Also, you're wrong about the Minutes from June being the last ones--or the last publication offered by the CSM. There is a sticky post in Jita Park which has a link to a wiki page that lists all of the "public" communications and activities that CSM5 has done, including minutes, official blogs, working meetings, and other stuff. CSM Minutes and Blogs get the same kind of exposure on EVE O that dev blogs do. If people aren't paying attention, it's not like you can reach through the Interwebs to smack them in the forehead with a brick to make them do so.

Dirk Decibel
Posted - 2011.03.18 13:05:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: Mynxee
Edited by: Mynxee on 18/03/2011 12:24:50
Originally by: Dirk Decibel
At minimum, there should be large posters across ur screen when loggin in during election time. ...

The most recent meeting minutes are from almost a year ago, if there wasn't an election going on right now any uninformed visitor to the CSM section of this website would think it was dead Laughing

If you wan't the masses to be interested, all this has to change.


Dirk, there have been CSM "vote" posters on the login screen and on the EVE O website since the polls opened. As well, CCP sent out a "CSM" newsletter with links to all the information you're suggesting. CSM5 and CCP discussed ideas for this stuff well in advance of the CSM6 elections and CCP deserves a lot of credit for the increased exposure they've given the CSM6 elections.

Also, you're wrong about the Minutes from June being the last ones--or the last publication offered by the CSM. There is a sticky post in Jita Park which has a link to a wiki page that lists all of the "public" communications and activities that CSM5 has done, including minutes, official blogs, working meetings, and other stuff. CSM Minutes and Blogs get the same kind of exposure on EVE O that dev blogs do. If people aren't paying attention, it's not like you can reach through the Interwebs to smack them in the forehead with a brick to make them do so.



One poster is not going to grab attention. If I don't look at it the first time for whatever reason (sometimes ppl are in a hurry for instance) it's gone. During election time, you need to make a lot of noise, just like in RL. It's virtually impossible to not know there is an election going where I live, in EVE, it's very possible.

Let me give you an example: 3 or 4 days ago a m8 asked when the polls closed. I thought that would be easy to find, much to my dismay I ended up heaving to search the news archives. Things link that should be permanently in sight. When I go the the CSM tag on the left on this very page, I expect information like that to be available immediatly. And this is just one example.

As for the meeting minutes: I know they are being published and where to look more or less but even then I had trbl finding the most recent minutes plenty of times. And on the CSM menu on this site (the one at the left of your screen again) the most recent minutes are from the CCP-CSM meeting somewhere in 2010.http://www.eveonline.com/council/voting/transcripts.asp


Knug LiDi
N00bFleeT
Posted - 2011.03.18 13:07:00 - [49]
 

Quote:
If people aren't paying attention, it's not like you can reach through the Interwebs to smack them in the forehead with a brick to make them do so.


Oh please, please, please, let this eventually come to pass.

Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.03.18 14:29:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Knug LiDi
Quote:
If people aren't paying attention, it's not like you can reach through the Interwebs to smack them in the forehead with a brick to make them do so.


Oh please, please, please, let this eventually come to pass.


No kidding.

Dirk: I agree, the poll closing date/time should be PROMINENTLY featured on the ads if it is not. But the last few times I logged in, there was an ad on the login screen so I think it is persistent unless bumped by something with more immediate relevance.

And FWIW, I agree with you the CSM pages on the EVE O site are not at all useful with regard to content or organization--particularly outside elections. However, CSM5 addressed this with CCP both at the June Summit and elsewhere to no avail. If nothing else the Main link should point to a CSM portal page on the EVElopedia. Such a page has been discussed with YARR; no infoz on any progress of late.




Suveitar
Posted - 2011.03.18 14:58:00 - [51]
 

Edited by: Suveitar on 18/03/2011 15:10:52
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
With respect to changes in the voting procedure, it might be interesting to consider some sort of alternate-vote system that lets people vote for more than one candidate (there are many such systems). This would permit people to support candidates whom they liked, but would not otherwise vote for because they think they can't get elected.


Originally by: Pirokobo
[...]What you empire pubbies don't seem to get is that there are more motivated voters in blocs then there are outside. If you multiply everyone's votes, you multiply the number of votes for blocs.[...]


I believe Trebor might be talking about an alternate vote system or preferential voting system - which is something different than simply multiplying the votes per person.

An alternate vote system might work as this:
(its also known as the Single Transferable Vote)

- you select a first priority candidate and a second priority candidate

- in effect (simplified): if your first priority candidate gets enough votes to get elected, then thats great. If not, your single vote is transferred to your second priority candidate, who might then have a chance of getting elected.

In fact an alternate vote system makes very good sense in an election such as this, were there are no registered "parties" or "lists" to vote for. It is in its essence a system to minimize the "loss" of votes.

Such a system will greatly benefit the players outside the organised blocks, since it becomes much safer to vote for a less popular candidate, without risking to loose your vote.


Originally by: Wikipedia
The system minimizes "wasted" votes, provides proportional representation, and ensures that votes are explicitly cast for individual candidates rather than closed party lists. It achieves this by using multi-seat constituencies (voting districts) and by transferring votes to other eligible candidates that would otherwise be wasted on sure losers or winners.

Extreme
Eye of God
Intergalactic Exports Group
Posted - 2011.03.18 15:30:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: Suveitar


I believe Trebor might be talking about an alternate vote system or preferential voting system - which is something different than simply multiplying the votes per person.




FYI
Trebor was responding to my suggestion for a different vote system.

He forgot however to quote the source (me)

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.18 15:31:00 - [53]
 

Edited by: Trebor Daehdoow on 18/03/2011 15:32:47
Originally by: Pirokobo
Get it through your thick and remarkably shiny forehead: the current system is the *most* fair system to assure we don't sweep you completely.

My dear Pirokobo, if you can possibly distract yourself from your obsessed contemplation of my remarkably shiny yet formidably attractive forehead (I buff it daily with Zog's Original Sex Wax), you may wish to educate yourself on voting systems before making such statements.

While it is mathematically provable that there is no voting system that is immune to pathological results, there are election systems that generate results that more closely represent the actual will of the electorate than single vote systems. These typically do not provide voters with extra votes, but transfer their votes from preferred but losing candidates to second or third choices. The overall effect is to encourage people to vote more honestly, because they prevent "wasted" votes.

Such systems also handle the issue of candidates who are forced to drop of out the election, as Kalrand did this time.

While I appreciate your obvious concern for the voting rights of the great unwashed masses of high-sec, the situation in EVE is not really that much different from that in the real world, where you have highly organized political parties (the alliances) and a significant number of independent voters.

@Suveitar: yes, that class of voting systems was what I was referring to.

@Extreme: I do not believe your suggestion will achieve what you think it will, and would oppose it on grounds of equity.

Two step
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2011.03.18 18:55:00 - [54]
 

I feel that most of the alternative voting schemes would actually make large blocks more powerful and more likely to get elected. For example, it seems likely to me that someone like mittani will get more votes than strictly needed to get elected, and in most systems his extra votes would move down to their 2nd place choice, which would likely be another member of his 0.0 coalition. As it is now, large entities need to be careful not to give one of their candidate too many votes and the others too few, and alternative voting systems would remove that.

My personal reforms would be the following:
1) Require some number of "signatures" to make the ballot. This should reduce the number of non-serious candidates. Something like one or two hundred signatures would work well.
2) I would lengthen the time before voting starts but after the valid candidates are announced. There are some great people out there like lost in eve that did some wonderful debates, and they didn't have a chance to get those done *before* voting had started.
3) Shorten the length of time after voting closes when the winners are announced. It seems crazy that it takes week after voting for CCP to run a SQL query. Real life elections are counted quite a bit faster.

Basically, fewer but higher quality candidates would give folks a much better chance of being able to look at everyone.

Suveitar
Posted - 2011.03.18 19:16:00 - [55]
 

Edited by: Suveitar on 18/03/2011 19:16:59
Originally by: Extreme

FYI
Trebor was responding to my suggestion for a different vote system.

He forgot however to quote the source (me)


And FYI I was quoting Trebor instead of you, because his suggestion is far superior to the one you made IMHO :)

No offense intended, but your system is badly conceived.

Dirk Decibel
Posted - 2011.03.18 20:13:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Mynxee


Dirk: I agree, the poll closing date/time should be PROMINENTLY featured on the ads if it is not. But the last few times I logged in, there was an ad on the login screen so I think it is persistent unless bumped by something with more immediate relevance.

And FWIW, I agree with you the CSM pages on the EVE O site are not at all useful with regard to content or organization--particularly outside elections. However, CSM5 addressed this with CCP both at the June Summit and elsewhere to no avail. If nothing else the Main link should point to a CSM portal page on the EVElopedia. Such a page has been discussed with YARR; no infoz on any progress of late.

Just tried it, and on log on there is only a news item on the right. But those tend to get buried quickly and from my experience most ppl don't read the news anyway.

Well I guess CSM6 has their work cut out for them. Put the pressure on CCP to finally give the CSM the exposure it deserves.

But CCP does not seem to be very talented at website design in general....

Extreme
Eye of God
Intergalactic Exports Group
Posted - 2011.03.18 20:27:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Suveitar
Edited by: Suveitar on 18/03/2011 19:16:59
Originally by: Extreme

FYI
Trebor was responding to my suggestion for a different vote system.

He forgot however to quote the source (me)


And FYI I was quoting Trebor instead of you, because his suggestion is far superior to the one you made IMHO :)

No offense intended, but your system is badly conceived.


At least you quote'd :)

At least it's good thing that there is public discussion about this topic now

Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.03.18 21:20:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Dirk Decibel
Just tried it, and on log on there is only a news item on the right. But those tend to get buried quickly and from my experience most ppl don't read the news anyway.

Well I guess CSM6 has their work cut out for them. Put the pressure on CCP to finally give the CSM the exposure it deserves.

But CCP does not seem to be very talented at website design in general....


Bah, just tried logging in and now the ad is no longer there. Should be persistent regardless of whatever else is displayed, maybe even in a special location in one corner or something. But yeah...it's only the last few days of the election, right? Rolling Eyes Sigh.

Gehen Sealbreaker
Amarr
Posted - 2011.03.19 11:00:00 - [59]
 

It looks like we're going to breach 50k :)

I was not too educated on voting systems before reading this thread, I must admit. After some reading and the inevitable hyperlink compulsive clicking, while I somehow ended up on a page about some aspects of Buddhism, I also gathered some new knowledge about these election systems.
And I concur, a system that would create less "wasted votes" would be better for the EVE community.

Moscow Blue
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.19 18:46:00 - [60]
 

Edited by: Moscow Blue on 19/03/2011 18:46:24
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
However, before such a system is implemented, it should be extensively debated to ensure that it would be difficult to game by large voting blocs.

Yeah, definitely, putting something up for debate on the internet is the solution that you were looking for here.

hint: this will accomplish nothing and you're just putting words together to make yourself sound important


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