open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked Assmebly Hall not working as intended
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Kayscha
Posted - 2008.05.22 21:16:00 - [1]
 

I'm posting this here where things have suddenly become nicely quiet and I don't really want to raise an issue to be voted on, more voice my concern.
Apparently everyone else is currently posting like mad over there, with around 50 issues being raised in just a few hours and threads being pushed back in no time. Important issues are being trampled underfoot, ineptly worded in the first place or repeated endlessly in slight variations on multiple threads. People will have a look now and will certainly be turned away by the sheer chaos. I don't think this will do.

Certain standards and rules seem to be needed, and I find myself hard-pressed to come up with any that would work. Some (rather bad) ideas:
- limit thread starting privilege to one per day
- keep issues with many views on top until taken up by CSM
- keep issues with high number of support on top
- keep issues with high support ratio on top
(best find a good mix of the three)
- make CSM member created threads (and postings, too) stick out visually
- allow CSM members to moderate threads based on ambiguity, redundancy or simply thread quality, moving, rewording, locking them as deemed best

One point I'm certain of, though: Don't let players vote more than once with their single account alts as they can now! :O

Suggestions? Opinions?

Kayscha
Posted - 2008.05.22 21:19:00 - [2]
 

Oops, missed other thread. Plz merge or something.... Embarassed

Tareen Kashaar
Gyoza Society
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.05.22 23:13:00 - [3]
 

Originally by: Kayscha
One point I'm certain of, though: Don't let players vote more than once with their single account alts as they can now! :O


Absolutely signed. I would post an [Issue] thread about it, but it's really not an issue for CSM deliberation, but one for CCP to fix.

One *support* vote per account, not per character slot!

As for your suggestions: I believe the CSM members will have more than enough on their hands without being tasked with moderation duties. That should stay in the hands of the forum mod team. Agree with your other suggestions however.

Jonathan Swift
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.05.24 14:44:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Jonathan Swift on 24/05/2008 14:44:08
I certainly agree. I Have not posted in some threads for the same reason, many of the threads are way off topic and bounces up and down like a Nuclear-powered jumpball, Its impossible to keep track of anything. There has to be some amount of structure and moderation to get an overview in the chaos, not only for us, but also for the CSM representatives. I like your suggestions, thumbs up ;)


Miner Nine
Caldari
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2008.05.24 23:39:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Kayscha-Editted, added numbers

1- limit thread starting privilege to one per day
2- keep issues with many views on top until taken up by CSM
3- keep issues with high number of support on top
4- keep issues with high support ratio on top
(best find a good mix of the three)
5- make CSM member created threads (and postings, too) stick out visually
6- allow CSM members to moderate threads based on ambiguity, redundancy or simply thread quality, moving, rewording, locking them as deemed best
7-Don't let players vote more than once with their single account alts as they can now! :O


1- Jita Park Speakers Corner, in my opinion this section should be nearly unmoderated except for extreme abuse. Thus, as many threads you want unless if it got to be abusive. What's abusive? Needs to be define but pretty much something that harms the general community over and over.
2-No, if you want a thread to keep living. Then keep adding to it.
3-No, you want a lot of things up top. There wouldn't be room for new issues with little support due to their new.
4-See 3, if you want a thread to keep alive. Then find additional content to add it. Threads with the newest post should be up top, that's how it is for countless forums.
5-Don't have a problem with this one. Unless if they cause seizures, then I'm all for it.
6-This is stupid imho, their not moderators. Their internet spaceship pilots who are in large alliances or Empire huggable
7-Companys, stock. You're paying 15buck a month times number accounts. You should have more votes due to this affects you to a higher amount then the rest. I only have one account, I'm fine with my one vote. Yet, those with 12 accounts should be able to have a larger voice then I.

Hugh Ruka
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
Posted - 2008.05.26 14:12:00 - [6]
 

Assembly Hall turned into the mess I expected it to do. The forums are grossly unprepared in functionality for this kind of discussion and process.

It seems CCP left the CSM in the cold and all of us with them. So far the CSM is a failure.

I hope things turn to the better.

Theramin Dogon
Gallente
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.05.26 23:24:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Hugh Ruka
Assembly Hall turned into the mess I expected it to do.
To be fair, I'm not sure the population understands the difference between "tell CCP some ideas/problems for game mechanics" and "tell your CSM some ideas/problems to bring up in council meetings".

(One is Features and Ideas Discussion, the other is Assembly Hall.)

Captain Narmio
Blue Republic
Posted - 2008.05.30 03:11:00 - [8]
 

The big problem with the current implementation of the Assembly Hall is that, thanks to the requirement to post to vote, and the *implicit assumption* that someone who posts but does not give the thumbs up does not approve, the only way to assess support is by a ratio of supports to posts.

And that means that any thread which has healthy discussion in it looks identical to a thread that contains mostly rejections.

It's also a right pain in the primary thruster to have to read half a dozen pages of "/signed" to find three posts containing actual discussion, but other people have touched on that.

Separating posting from supporting is needed, but so is separating posting but not supporting from actual rejection. At least, if this is intended as a platform for discussion rather than just a poll. The current supports/posts = approval rating is seriously flawed.

Calyce
Gallente
Posted - 2008.05.30 08:11:00 - [9]
 

Why not make the Assembly hall only allow threads started by the CSM guys?

The "jita speakers corner" is for us players to raise issues and start gathering support.

When an issue is considered interesting by a CSM rep, he/she will post a summary into the assembly hall - now the topic starts its 7 days discussion before being brought up at the actual CSM meeting.
During those 7 days we have to do the whole pro/con argument in the thread.

reasonable?

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2008.05.30 18:10:00 - [10]
 

Whats really funny is that disscussions like these are what lead to super delgates in the US election system.

hmm I wouldn't mind running for delgate, maybe only they could start dissicions?

However seeing as 200,000 is a lot less than the population of america I think they'll be able to figure it out.

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2008.05.30 18:18:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Captain Narmio
The big problem with the current implementation of the Assembly Hall is that, thanks to the requirement to post to vote, and the *implicit assumption* that someone who posts but does not give the thumbs up does not approve, the only way to assess support is by a ratio of supports to posts.

And that means that any thread which has healthy discussion in it looks identical to a thread that contains mostly rejections.

It's also a right pain in the primary thruster to have to read half a dozen pages of "/signed" to find three posts containing actual discussion, but other people have touched on that.

Separating posting from supporting is needed, but so is separating posting but not supporting from actual rejection. At least, if this is intended as a platform for discussion rather than just a poll. The current supports/posts = approval rating is seriously flawed.


QFT.

Originally by: MotherMoon
Whats really funny is that disscussions like these are what lead to super delgates in the US election system.

hmm I wouldn't mind running for delgate, maybe only they could start dissicions?

However seeing as 200,000 is a lot less than the population of america I think they'll be able to figure it out.


No, it was the candidacy of George McGovern, and his annihilation by Richard Nixon in 1972, that led to ex officio "superdelegates" gaining the stature they have today - the Democratic Party wanted to ensure that they'd never get a populist loser of a candidate again, and gave party officials around 20% of the vote to stop it from happening. Every party I've ever heard of has some ex officios - usually, senior party officials or senior elected partisans - but few give it the same focus as the Democrats do in the US. Then again, the Democrats have the single most complex electoral system in human history(no exaggeration), so I'm no longer surprised by anything they do.

Also, for our population, we have a pretty typical ratio of elected officials - I live in a city of 100,000 or so with 10 councilors and a mayor, and I play a game with probably 100,000 real humans behind the controls and 9 delegates with 5 alternates to represent us. We don't need another layer of represntation.

Elseix
Posted - 2008.05.30 22:42:00 - [12]
 

Edited by: Elseix on 30/05/2008 22:43:28
I tried to bring this up in that forum, which unsurprisingly was a waste of time.

A possible solution:

1. Decide how many votes should really be needed (clearly the current threshold is stupid)
2. Figure out how many views/timelimit should be given before an [idea] thread is considered to have run its course and failed to garner the needed support.
3. Setup the Assembly forum so that it only holds one page of [idea] threads for people to view and vote on.

Right now the average pilot doesn't care because to hell with reading the current mess and dealing with the fact that you can't tell if you voted on a thread and the threads are spread over 10 pages and many are repeat issues and good issues are buried while issues that create tons of enmity are bumped constantly *cough* suicide ganking *endcough*

Considering from browsing the transcripts of that first meeting the CSM's seem to know that the eve populations interest and involvement is sadly low atm fixing the worthless assembly hall forum should be a top priority.

Here's a hint, most people don't want keep track of more then 20 threads, if that many at a given time. If its a regular eve forum with the regular amount of spam and crap going on everyone is going to stick with playing eve instead of reading all that trash and trying to vote on the few good ideas.

Limited thread creation window, total or limited thread creation rights. Keep the clutter in other forums like this one. Rotate the threads every 1-4 weeks whatever is deemed a fair amount of time for everyone to get to talk about them, view them and vote.

Phantom Slave
Universal Pest Exterminators
Posted - 2008.06.04 05:04:00 - [13]
 

What about a thread voting system? Everybody could just open the thread, and click a "Yes" or "No" to vote for the subject without having to actually post. It could also be "forbidden" to post in the thread without having something constructive to add to it. This would limit the amount of "/signed" posts and allow everybody to see the actual votes of yes/no.

I haven't even made it into the other section so I don't know if this is implemented or not.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.06.04 07:15:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Calyce
Why not make the Assembly hall only allow threads started by the CSM guys?

The "jita speakers corner" is for us players to raise issues and start gathering support.

When an issue is considered interesting by a CSM rep, he/she will post a summary into the assembly hall - now the topic starts its 7 days discussion before being brought up at the actual CSM meeting.
During those 7 days we have to do the whole pro/con argument in the thread.

reasonable?


Its entirely reasonable. And they don't have to change anything they can just make the threads in the Jita Park forum instead of the assembly hall forum.

Jade Constantine however, has rejected this idea out of hand instead of doing the sensible thing and having discussions on topics.

Arithron
Gallente
Gallente Trade Alliance
Posted - 2008.06.04 07:56:00 - [15]
 

Quote:
Originally by: Kayscha
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One point I'm certain of, though: Don't let players vote more than once with their single account alts as they can now! :O
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Absolutely signed. I would post an [Issue] thread about it, but it's really not an issue for CSM deliberation, but one for CCP to fix.

One *support* vote per account, not per character slot!


Hmm, are you saying that in the last election, each Alt could also cast a vote? If so, this seems to me pretty outrageous and the vote tallies of the candidates need to be adjusted to take account of this- as some will have only a third as many votes etc!

Take care,
Arithron

Kayscha
Posted - 2008.06.05 21:32:00 - [16]
 

No.

What seems to be the case, though, is that people are allowed to support issues repeatedly using the different characters on their accounts.

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2008.06.05 22:06:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Arithron
Quote:
Originally by: Kayscha
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One point I'm certain of, though: Don't let players vote more than once with their single account alts as they can now! :O
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Absolutely signed. I would post an [Issue] thread about it, but it's really not an issue for CSM deliberation, but one for CCP to fix.

One *support* vote per account, not per character slot!


Hmm, are you saying that in the last election, each Alt could also cast a vote? If so, this seems to me pretty outrageous and the vote tallies of the candidates need to be adjusted to take account of this- as some will have only a third as many votes etc!

Take care,
Arithron


No, it was one per account in the election, but it's one per character on the forums. The system isn't totally screwed.

BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2008.06.07 17:58:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Theramin Dogon
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
Assembly Hall turned into the mess I expected it to do.
To be fair, I'm not sure the population understands the difference between "tell CCP some ideas/problems for game mechanics" and "tell your CSM some ideas/problems to bring up in council meetings".

(One is Features and Ideas Discussion, the other is Assembly Hall.)


LOL do you think CCP actually read the features and discusions forum?? i dont think ive ever seen a ccp reply for anything good.
Is why many post their annoyances in general discussion, ships/modules and the assembly hall etc so they may just may, get looked at (but still probably wont coz ccp dont give a sh*t about important things liked crap citadel torps, the pilgrim, the nighthawk etc, which all need love. Theyd all rather say "wow ambulation is coming isnt that coooool" Rolling Eyes).

Pirc Balar
Minmatar
Freedom Research Front
Posted - 2008.06.11 06:45:00 - [19]
 

This sounds like something the fine people at OMG Labs might be interested in looking at. I'd imagine that there might even be a way to get eve search to do the kind of sorting you all are discussing here.

Demarcus
Killjoy.
Posted - 2008.06.11 23:44:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: Demarcus on 11/06/2008 23:44:30
The Council of Stellar Management is the most useless thing CCP has ever come up with, and that must have taken some effort Rolling Eyes.

Astria Tiphareth
Caldari
24th Imperial Crusade
Posted - 2008.06.12 18:06:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Phantom Slave
What about a thread voting system? Everybody could just open the thread, and click a "Yes" or "No" to vote for the subject without having to actually post. It could also be "forbidden" to post in the thread without having something constructive to add to it. This would limit the amount of "/signed" posts and allow everybody to see the actual votes of yes/no.


I believe other forum systems have this curious notion called a... oh what is it called... oh yes, a poll Cool

I am somewhat surprised we don't.

Astria Tiphareth
Caldari
24th Imperial Crusade
Posted - 2008.06.12 18:07:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: BiggestT
LOL do you think CCP actually read the features and discusions forum?? i dont think ive ever seen a ccp reply for anything good.
Is why many post their annoyances in general discussion, ships/modules and the assembly hall etc so they may just may, get looked at (but still probably wont coz ccp dont give a sh*t about important things liked crap citadel torps, the pilgrim, the nighthawk etc, which all need love. Theyd all rather say "wow ambulation is coming isnt that coooool" Rolling Eyes).


Then you haven't spent much time in there. I've only been reading it for about four months and seen quite a few CCP replies and stuff that then made it into dev blogs. You're talking rubbish, do some research.

Orb Lati
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2008.06.12 20:23:00 - [23]
 

What needs to be implemented is more sub folders, broken into the 4 races plus 1 for alliances and a non postable folder for popular where only csm members can move very popular threads for wider discussion.
Under those then you add folders for items like pos mechanics, sovereignty and ship classes. this would reduce alot of the multiple threads on the same subject.

Next you need a vote meter implemented viewable from the thread title but not requiring a response post, just login and vote, 1 vote per account per thread.


 

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