open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Issue] Votes of No Confidence in CSM Members
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6

Author Topic

Silence Duegood
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:20:00 - [31]
 

/signed

Goons and their behaviour have no place on the CSM board.

Phrixus Zephyr
MEK Enterprises
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:23:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Gorobom
Originally by: Phrixus Zephyr
Originally by: Gorobom
Originally by: Phrixus Zephyr
You clearly have no idea of what SA is like. Yes, alot of it is lolgoons, but they're more than capable of intelligent discussion.

See forums like D&D, instead of making rediculous statements based on alliance and hearsay.

(Yes, i am also well aware that the first person to smack me will proberbly be a Goon.)


He can just look at other posts in this very forum. He already signed some started by goons.

Yes and I can also form an opinion of a race/nation of people based on the actions of a few aswell.

Or, you can take my suggestion and go look at SA and find plenty of intelligent discusion that would put anything eve-o has on offer to shame.


You misunderstood me.

Hmmm. Re-reading, yes i did. My apologies.

Siona Windweaver
Placeholder Holdings
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:24:00 - [33]
 

I support this idea.

Ispitane
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:37:00 - [34]
 

Perhaps Goons, being lesser mortals, should only be awarded three fifths of a vote each?

Revan Neferis
Amarr
Bloodveil
BLOOD EMPIRE
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:38:00 - [35]
 

No. Liking or disliking they are paying members with legitimate accounts and were elected by the same process and rules as all other candidates.

Actually, this topic goes to show how CSM is bind to work.... Rolling Eyes

Elections were done, people should just move on with the results and try to at least show some maturity in the matter.

Thumbs down.

Esmenet
Gallente
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:40:00 - [36]
 

Add ankehemepteksahs to the list of undesireables and i give you a thumbs up.

Sally Bestonge
Ministry of War
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:41:00 - [37]
 

sup thread where is jade he doesn't like he, he should be posting here.

Fayt Leingod
Power Industries
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:43:00 - [38]
 

the issue here is not goons or any alliance. the major issue is that some of the council members dont seem to realize that there alliance and corp tag means nothing. their there for our binfit as the player base not there alliance.

Seiver D'amross
Subach-Tech
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:44:00 - [39]
 

damn my alt being default thats ^ me

Trader Man
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:48:00 - [40]
 

Totally support the idea, if you think about the whole election then obviously two goons was a rigged election.

In any proper ellection there is a notion of majority voters participating,
CCP claims that there total of around 200k acounts, all in all only around 10k ppl participated, that means only approximatelly 5% of eve population participated.

Lets take this analysis a bit further, according to official statistic average age of participant was around 1,5 game time, that implies that for sure an average participant is totally aware of obnoxiously stupid behavior of goonswarm people, hence the probability of him voting for goonswarm is very low !UNLESS! he is goonswarm member himself.

Goonswarm is a very big and active alliance, they could easily encourage their fellow members on internal forums to vote for their candidates.

This situation would not have occured in the first place if rate of participation was much higher. Although I do realise that it is very difficult to speculate about potential ellection outcome, however I would forecast that if rate of participation was sufficiently high then none of goonswarm members would have been elected.

Maybe an appropriate solution would be to re-run the ellection, but this time introduce some sort of encouragement policy to induce more ppl to vote (carrot cake maybe?)

This way electorate base which be much more representative and will reflect true will of eve comunity !

Hrin
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:48:00 - [41]
 

Goonswarm represents a clear and present danger to all Eve. Are you a bad enough dude to support this issue?

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Gorobom
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:51:00 - [42]
 

Edited by: Gorobom on 22/05/2008 17:53:02
Originally by: Trader Man
Totally support the idea, if you think about the whole election then obviously two goons was a rigged election.

In any proper ellection there is a notion of majority voters participating,
CCP claims that there total of around 200k acounts, all in all only around 10k ppl participated, that means only approximatelly 5% of eve population participated.

Lets take this analysis a bit further, according to official statistic average age of participant was around 1,5 game time, that implies that for sure an average participant is totally aware of obnoxiously stupid behavior of goonswarm people, hence the probability of him voting for goonswarm is very low !UNLESS! he is goonswarm member himself.

Goonswarm is a very big and active alliance, they could easily encourage their fellow members on internal forums to vote for their candidates.

This situation would not have occured in the first place if rate of participation was much higher. Although I do realise that it is very difficult to speculate about potential ellection outcome, however I would forecast that if rate of participation was sufficiently high then none of goonswarm members would have been elected.

Maybe an appropriate solution would be to re-run the ellection, but this time introduce some sort of encouragement policy to induce more ppl to vote (carrot cake maybe?)

This way electorate base which be much more representative and will reflect true will of eve comunity !


It already does. It reflects that the "eve comunity" doesn't care about CSM, while Goonswarm does. It reflects that the "eve comunity's true will" is that of not bothering with the game much, while Goonswarm did enough so that they got two members in CSM.

This is what the elections reflect. If the "eve comunity" cared as much as Goons did, then the results would be different. But they didn't. Why should they be psychologically forced to vote? Not every goon voted either.

The majority of people posting here serious issues so far have been goonswarm members. Some of these issues have been supported by anti-goon members. The two Goon members of the CSM have been extremely serious about it so far.

Tolis Irithel
Northstar Cabal
R.A.G.E
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:51:00 - [43]
 

Edited by: Tolis Irithel on 22/05/2008 17:51:14
I've already stated my support for the concept of no-confidence votes in the other thread. For the same reasons set out there, I'll sign this thread; not because I support the removal of the Goonswarm members, but because I agree with the no-confidence idea.

Unfortunately, even real-life elections these days don't have majority turnout in all/many cases; elections here in England being an example of such. The real way to get more people to vote is to demonstrate that the CSM is a relevant entity; something that is in the hands of the community, CSM members and CCP.

Democracy is what you make of it. (Apologies, I've wandered off-topic)

Trader Man
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:59:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Gorobom
Originally by: Trader Man
Totally support the idea, if you think about the whole election then obviously two goons was a rigged election.

In any proper ellection there is a notion of majority voters participating,
CCP claims that there total of around 200k acounts, all in all only around 10k ppl participated, that means only approximatelly 5% of eve population participated.

Lets take this analysis a bit further, according to official statistic average age of participant was around 1,5 game time, that implies that for sure an average participant is totally aware of obnoxiously stupid behavior of goonswarm people, hence the probability of him voting for goonswarm is very low !UNLESS! he is goonswarm member himself.

Goonswarm is a very big and active alliance, they could easily encourage their fellow members on internal forums to vote for their candidates.

This situation would not have occured in the first place if rate of participation was much higher. Although I do realise that it is very difficult to speculate about potential ellection outcome, however I would forecast that if rate of participation was sufficiently high then none of goonswarm members would have been elected.

Maybe an appropriate solution would be to re-run the ellection, but this time introduce some sort of encouragement policy to induce more ppl to vote (carrot cake maybe?)

This way electorate base which be much more representative and will reflect true will of eve comunity !


It already does. It reflects that the "eve comunity" doesn't care about CSM, while Goonswarm does. It reflects that the "eve comunity's true will" is that of not bothering with the game much, while Goonswarm did enough so that they got two members in CSM.

This is what the elections reflect. If the "eve comunity" cared as much as Goons did, then the results would be different. But they didn't. Why should they be psychologically forced to vote? Not every goon voted either.


Clearly your logic is faulty here, if what you said was true, then decisions which CSM makes should ONLY be affecting that small group of ppl.

Imagine this, you got a town - there are 1000 ppl living in this town, during maoyr ellections only mayor himself turned up and 5 of his friends, and everyone obviously voted for mayor. Does that mean that Mayor got right to make new laws which would affect the whole population? Obviously not.

If none else turned up for the ellection they indeed deem this exercise pointless and they do not need a mayor, hence mayor position should not be introduced in the first place.

If you observe any reasonably democratic country in the world, it would say in the constitution that ellections are NOT valid, unless certain % of population turns and unless that particular candidate gets a majority of votes in excess of some threshold.

How to solve this problem again - is to induce more ppl to participate in the ellection, give free trit or some other crap or smth like that and explain to people that there vote actually matters.


P.S. and don't tell me this bulcrap that 80% of goonswarm did not vote for goons swarm representative, that is obviously a lie !

schneirder
Viziam
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:03:00 - [45]
 

Edited by: schneirder on 22/05/2008 18:02:54
Originally by: Trader Man

Imagine this, you got a town - there are 1000 ppl living in this town, during maoyr ellections only mayor himself turned up and 5 of his friends, and everyone obviously voted for mayor. Does that mean that Mayor got right to make new laws which would affect the whole population? Obviously not.

If none else turned up for the ellection they indeed deem this exercise pointless and they do not need a mayor, hence mayor position should not be introduced in the first place.



I don't think you "get" democracy. If you don't vote (and a spoiled ballot or otherwise vote of no), then you don't get to complain about the outcome. If you don't want a 'Mayor', then vote in a fashion that demonstrates so.

Trader Man
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:05:00 - [46]
 

Edited by: Trader Man on 22/05/2008 18:05:35
Originally by: schneirder
Edited by: schneirder on 22/05/2008 18:02:54
Originally by: Trader Man

Imagine this, you got a town - there are 1000 ppl living in this town, during maoyr ellections only mayor himself turned up and 5 of his friends, and everyone obviously voted for mayor. Does that mean that Mayor got right to make new laws which would affect the whole population? Obviously not.

If none else turned up for the ellection they indeed deem this exercise pointless and they do not need a mayor, hence mayor position should not be introduced in the first place.





I don't think you "get" democracy. If you don't vote (and a spoiled ballot or otherwise vote of no), then you don't get to complain about the outcome. If you don't want a 'Mayor', then vote in a fashion that demonstrates so.


Thats a classic comment in the tradition of goonswarm , it demonstrates total inability to follow your opponent logic and bring reasonable argument to counter it lol

Ispitane
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:05:00 - [47]
 

Quote:
If you observe any reasonably democratic country in the world, it would say in the constitution that ellections are NOT valid, unless certain % of population turns and unless that particular candidate gets a majority of votes in excess of some threshold.


Let's take the United Kingdom, which (rigging of postal votes aside) is somewhat democratic. Please find something somewhere on www.statutelaw.gov.uk that specifies a minimum number of votes for the election of an MP to be valid.

Esmenet
Gallente
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:06:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: schneirder
Edited by: schneirder on 22/05/2008 18:02:54
Originally by: Trader Man

Imagine this, you got a town - there are 1000 ppl living in this town, during maoyr ellections only mayor himself turned up and 5 of his friends, and everyone obviously voted for mayor. Does that mean that Mayor got right to make new laws which would affect the whole population? Obviously not.

If none else turned up for the ellection they indeed deem this exercise pointless and they do not need a mayor, hence mayor position should not be introduced in the first place.



I don't think you "get" democracy. If you don't vote (and a spoiled ballot or otherwise vote of no), then you don't get to complain about the outcome. If you don't want a 'Mayor', then vote in a fashion that demonstrates so.


This isnt a democracy though. Its more like an oligarchy supported by a puppet goverment.

Gorobom
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:08:00 - [49]
 

Edited by: Gorobom on 22/05/2008 18:21:41
Originally by: Trader Man

Clearly your logic is faulty here, if what you said was true, then decisions which CSM makes should ONLY be affecting that small group of ppl.

(words)

P.S. and don't tell me this bulcrap that 80% of goonswarm did not vote for goons swarm representative, that is obviously a lie !


My logic is not faulty, it simply represents the truth. The people that didn't vote didn't care about it. Period. If they did care, they would have voted. If they cared and didn't vote, they did so on their own, and this represents their "true will". There's no complicated logic in this.

Why should the votes of people who don't care about the elections count more than of the people who cared enough to get organized about it, and currently are posting the majority of serious threads here? By forcing them to post, you're actually trying to induce the elections favorable to yourself in an artificial way. I can guarantee you that if EVERYONE from GS and our allies were forced to vote, the outcome would be the same.

Also this is a game, not a town. This is not real life politics. People aren't gonna die because of hospitals not working.

Anyway, 11% of EVE Population voted. Goonswarm represents around 4% of EVE Population. Summing up with our allies (which everyone forgets about, they also voted) it adds up to around 15% of EVE Population, or 1/6. Consider now the chinese farmers who absolutely don't care about this at all. GS got around 1/5th of the CSM, which sounds like a fair number all things considered. I'm sure if RA/TCF/BoB had people up there, we would have got only one member, not two. At the end of the day GS is representing the exactly same amount of people it should.

The majority of people in GS didn't actually vote for Darius, they voted for Bane. Darius got a lot of his votes from other alliances.

When I say 15% of EVE players, I'm being extra nice, because I'm considering only the people who actively share the same politic interests as goonswarm. In practice, you could say some of our enemies or neutral people also share the same interests when it comes down to fixing the game, since it's all 0.0, and there aren't many who cares about it in the CSM. The amount of people in 0.0 alliances is well above that.

But since there's no official support from them, I leave that to your imagination. It doesn't nullify the previous paragraphs though.

Edit: By the way, I never said "80%". You're creating things. The truth is that a lot of goons didn't vote, some goons voted for Goumindong or other people, some very few goons actually comedy-voted to Jade or Eva Jobse, and the majority of goons that voted voted for Bane. Darius got his votes from other alliances. This is all there is to it.

Edit 2: If you got a town where 99.5% of the population don't care about the elections, something is incredibly wrong, and having the mayor being able to dictate the rules is definitely not the core of the problem.

At the end of the day, the truth is that about 3000 accounts voted for GS members (let's not forget the ones that didn't get in) and Bane and Darius got in. That's a lot of very valid votes, more votes than whoever you voted on got. What you guys are screaming is basically "don't let the black people vote! They don't have souls and have been on horrid wars in Africa or something.

Piitaq
Gallente
19th Star Logistics
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:14:00 - [50]
 

Goonswarm or not, the people have been voted in, therefore they should stay in, until next election.

People have the ones representing them they deserve, you people should have thought about it, when voting.

Ofcourse if electees dont attend the meetings, or in other ways dont do their job. They should be removed, but I do not think such things should or could be done preemptive.

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:15:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: Ispitane
Perhaps Goons, being lesser mortals, should only be awarded three fifths of a vote each?


Now now, if you're going to make that joke then you have to follow it through. Every Goon counts for 3/5, but the Goons themselves don't get to cast those votes, it just ups each RA vote proportionally.

Tolis Irithel
Northstar Cabal
R.A.G.E
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:21:00 - [52]
 

One thing I haven't seen mentioned in many places within the various CSM-oriented debates concerning voting turnout etc.

A lot of emphasis has been placed on 0.0-related issues not being given appropriate representation on the CSM committee. Now, forgive me if I'm wrong here, but...

1) Take a tight assumption (which I don't agree with) that the GoonSwarm CSM members, and only the GoonSwarm CSM members, are representing 0.0 interests). This represents 2/9, or c. 22% of the CSM.

2) According to the second economic report produced by CCP, only 19% of the "active accounts" within EVE (that moved system) entered 0.0.

Given that 22% > 19%, I *must* be missing something. As much for my own peace of mind as anything else, I'd quite like to know what it is.

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:24:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: Tolis Irithel
One thing I haven't seen mentioned in many places within the various CSM-oriented debates concerning voting turnout etc.

A lot of emphasis has been placed on 0.0-related issues not being given appropriate representation on the CSM committee. Now, forgive me if I'm wrong here, but...

1) Take a tight assumption (which I don't agree with) that the GoonSwarm CSM members, and only the GoonSwarm CSM members, are representing 0.0 interests). This represents 2/9, or c. 22% of the CSM.

2) According to the second economic report produced by CCP, only 19% of the "active accounts" within EVE (that moved system) entered 0.0.

Given that 22% > 19%, I *must* be missing something. As much for my own peace of mind as anything else, I'd quite like to know what it is.


What you're missing is that people don't like to do a lot of research or math by nature, and that anything less than 100% support is inadequate for some.

Gorobom
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:25:00 - [54]
 

Edited by: Gorobom on 22/05/2008 18:31:40
Originally by: Tolis Irithel
One thing I haven't seen mentioned in many places within the various CSM-oriented debates concerning voting turnout etc.

A lot of emphasis has been placed on 0.0-related issues not being given appropriate representation on the CSM committee. Now, forgive me if I'm wrong here, but...

1) Take a tight assumption (which I don't agree with) that the GoonSwarm CSM members, and only the GoonSwarm CSM members, are representing 0.0 interests). This represents 2/9, or c. 22% of the CSM.

2) According to the second economic report produced by CCP, only 19% of the "active accounts" within EVE (that moved system) entered 0.0.

Given that 22% > 19%, I *must* be missing something. As much for my own peace of mind as anything else, I'd quite like to know what it is.


Read my post above. I'll tell you what you're missing:

There's a lot more issues in 0.0 now than in high-sec. Furthermore, 0.0 players are forced against hard walls more often, making them more aware of the issues of EVE. This, combined with the fact 0.0 is mutable and entirely based on real-player politics, makes 0.0 players much more interested in voting and participating in those politics. This is what they've been doing constantly - politics. 0.0 alliances depend on it much more, since they actually "own" space. 0.0 Alliances are more organized usually, because you need to have well defined politics in order to sustain thousands and thousands of players.

To sum it up: Most High sec players never really faced serious, real politics in this game and care about it less than, say, your average GS member. This is reflected in the elections.

The second and more obvious clue: 22% is closer to 19% than 11%. Seriously.

I mean, you could say "Given that 11% < 19%, I *must* be missing something." and it would make more sense. You can't have exactly 19% of the representation in the CSM. It's either 11 or 22. 22 is closer to 19. Quite simple.

Something would be wrong if 100% of the players voted, but since most of them didn't care about the CSM for the aforementioned reasons (and others), this is how it turned out. 22 is still closer to 19 than 11 so I don't see this as something from another world.

Edit: Also, lots of people not related to 0.0 or our allies voted in GS members, because they presented real problems that no one else seemed to care about.

Tolis Irithel
Northstar Cabal
R.A.G.E
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:31:00 - [55]
 

Edited by: Tolis Irithel on 22/05/2008 18:32:05
I was never suggesting that the 22% was wrong, just for clarity; 22%>19% was not an argument that 22% was wrong. (I wouldn't make that argument because I don't agree that 22% is accurate, in any case.)

Fair enough though, you make perfectly good and valid points as to why members of large alliances may be considered to have more knowledge of the problems being discussed. I for one am quite happy with the range of different foci/opinions, on all sides of the debate.

(Editing, because the above post seems to have changed. I'm not really sure where the whole 11%<19% thing was coming from; I've never advocated or encouraged any change in CSM membership at all.)

Gorobom
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:34:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Tolis Irithel
Edited by: Tolis Irithel on 22/05/2008 18:32:05
I was never suggesting that the 22% was wrong, just for clarity; 22%>19% was not an argument that 22% was wrong. (I wouldn't make that argument because I don't agree that 22% is accurate, in any case.)

Fair enough though, you make perfectly good and valid points as to why members of large alliances may be considered to have more knowledge of the problems being discussed. I for one am quite happy with the range of different foci/opinions, on all sides of the debate.

(Editing, because the above post seems to have changed. I'm not really sure where the whole 11%<19% thing was coming from; I've never advocated or encouraged any change in CSM membership at all.)


The 11-19 thing is just that. 22% represents 0.0 better than 11%.

Well that's a nice reply, if everyone thought like you these forums would have less bash and drama, judging by your last posts.

Why'dyou HitMe
Minmatar
KAOS.
Imperial Republic Of the North
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:43:00 - [57]
 

Edited by: Why''dyou HitMe on 22/05/2008 19:07:14
NO SUPPORT
Point of the matter is that a majority of goons voted, most other groups did not. If it wasn’t important enough for you or your group to move the mouse the incredible distance it would have taken to vote then that is your problem not the community as a whole. The election is finished, the results should stand.

I like the goons, they like to have fun In a game… OMG!! Yes they are sick twisted little individuals, again why I like them.

I for one welcome our new goon overloards.

Calyce
Gallente
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:46:00 - [58]
 

I agree to an extent.
The council themselves should be able to ahve a vote of no confidence in other members, but only after they have had time to see what the person is like/doing.

This whole bloomin no confidence before the CSM has even done anything is completely stupid.

The two goonies who were voted in I have confidence in, but some of the utter ****ers who happen to be in the same alliance shoud be banned from the human race.

On the whole I'd say, no, we voters shouldn't have any more say in the matter once we have voted the members in. Thes rest should be up to the CSM candidates that we voted for.

If you didn't vote, then maybe next time you will actually bother to vote.

silence == acceptance.

Malar
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
Posted - 2008.05.22 18:47:00 - [59]
 

Originally by: Silence Duegood
/signed

Goons and their behaviour have no place on the CSM board.


seconded

Haakelen
Gallente
The Scope

Posted - 2008.05.22 18:49:00 - [60]
 

Yeah, only about Jade, not the goons.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6

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