EVE University graduate. Drama Llama. Covert operations pilot. Poetic Stanziel has been very active in the blogging community bringing views from seasoned high-sec pilots, we please to share his stories and views on current Eve Online events and invite you to read more stories from his Poetic Discourse blog.
Poetic Discourse: CSM7 – Voting Reform
The tl;dr for todays post is that the problem with CSM voting is not the people who vote, but the number of people who can’t be bothered to vote. Read the last three paragraphs if you’re an exceptionally busy person.
Today the CSM posted a voting reform thread. Basically it’s just a single idea they all pulled from their collective asses. They didn’t present an existing voting system, one already being successfully implemented somewhere in the world, a system that’s known to work. They didn’t present a theoretical voting system that’s been debated on by scholars for years, that has a lot of statistical analysis and theory behind it. No, the CSM decided, in their great wisdom, that they could create a new, never-before-seen voting system. You know, because these guys all have doctoral degrees in Sociology, Statistics and Political Science.
That’s their first win of the day.
Two reasons that the CSM give for this reform are enlightening:
Reduce (but not eliminate) the advantages held by highly organized voting blocs. In the previous election, for example, one voting bloc did extremely sophisticated exit-polling; if they had chosen to use this information to efficiently split their votes, they could have won 3 of the top 7 positions on the CSM.
. . . that some candidates have increasingly overwhelming information and organizational advantages, threatens to effectively disenfranchise a significant portion of the electorate.
They’re not responding to any actual problem from the CFC (the bloc they’re targeting as problematic), they’re responding to tinfoil-hattery, problems they think could/might happen, but have not actually happened.
In each of CSM6 and CSM7, the CFC bloc voted two candidates to positions on the CSM. I fail to see how this is a problem. Are they to be punished because a) they’re motivated voters, and b) they are highly organized? Pandemic Legion (who generally pride themselves on being independent) voted two candidates into CSM seats for CSM7. Are their votes any worse (or better) than the CFC’s votes?
(Should I point out the while there were ten nullsec representatives on CSM6, there are only six nullsec representatives on CSM7? CSM7 embodies a much larger demographic than CSM6 did. Representation of the varied playstyles of EVE Online has actually improved.)
Heaven forbid that individuals who have strong aptitudes for organizing and motivating large groups of people get voted onto the CSM. What the CSM doesn’t need more of are the Meissa Anunthiels, Issler Dainzes, Darius IIIs and Kelduum Revaans, invisible people who are more interested in the vanity of a CSM position than actually doing anything useful for the playerbase.
That’s the CSM’s second win of the day.
If there are 400K active accounts in EVE Online, and only 60K accounts took the time to cast a vote for CSM7, then the problem seems clear to me. The CSM should not be focusing on trying to invalidate votes from certain segments of the EVE Online population, rather they should be working harder, trying to come up with ways to increase voter turnout. The CSM should be encouraging the sort of motivated voter we see in nullsec, trying to figure out how to motivate voters across the board. The goal should not be to limit a segment of the nullsec vote.
It seems to me, the 60K accounts that took the time to vote, they are being properly represented. Of the other 340K accounts? Tough shit. They don’t vote, they don’t get represented. It’s as simple as that. Their complaints are moot.
One avenue for the CSM: maybe trying to convince CCP to make voting an in-client component. Perhaps at login, an account is immediately presented with a modal window that describes the CSM and the voting process, and presents three buttons: “I wish to vote now”, “I wish to abstain”, “I will vote later.” Until the account has voted or abstained, they are presented with this window every time they login to the client. If they wish to vote, they are presented with a list of the candidates, each with a short candidate-written summary of their platform. Simple as that. I bet that sort of in-client interface would increase voter turnout at least three-fold. (I’m not saying this is the solution, but it is the sort of thing that should be the focus of the CSM with regards voting, making it easier and more convenient for people to vote.)
Nothing says copy/paste like Sheet1 on a terribad Excel sheet.
good article and THIS is the perfect moment for CCP to have a talk about this.
True, I very much agree, perfect time
last week I created a Eve forum thread concerning what I see as the lack of HI SEC representation on the CSM… wonder if I put a fire under anybody's feet after the thread seemed to ignight
You have Kelduum and Issler. You got your candidates. You can't blame the system if they've both proven to be wet rags.
I only see 1 of them as HI SEC & he is an empty suit
I want to see a -1 vote in addition to abstension so we can vote people out & if everyone gets a negitive vote dissolve the CSM.
Lets make it a true referendum on how we feel about the candiates & the CSM.
Anyway something has to change IMHO. The current popular vote is breeding voter apathy like seen nowhere else ( shit even in the USA we have better voter turnout amonst the most disaffected )
So explain to me why abstaining and -1 votes would fix this. If I am a player who feels that nobody represents me, how is logging an abstention different from just not voting? I can sort of understand -1 votes, but this too will only do dumb things. While people like Mittens couldn't get elected because of spite, neither could anybody else. Basically the top 3-5 people would get drowned in -1 votes so the mid range random people who could get 700ish votes would be the main frontrunners. This makes literally no sense and wouldn't result in any better representation.
How about fragmenting CFC by Seat Types or Portfolios e.g. Null Sec, PvP, PvE, Incursions,Faction Warfare, Industry, Low Sec etc. and have candidates compete for those seats instead of just a raw numbers by representation.
Then all views will be represented instead of opinions being heavily bias towards any particular population segmentation.
This. It's something I've always been amazed has never happened. Real world democracies has seats for specific positions. So too should the CSM. We may then have a chance at a balanced playing experience.
One problem is how to qualify a candidate for a particular seat i.e., are you really a carebear or just a meta-gaming null sec grunt. Another problem is what to do when that candidate decides to change focus post-election.
Darius III would most likely represent naiveness since most of those guys got trolled to vote lol.
CONFRIMIGN ONLY DEGRES THIS PEEPOL ARE TO BE HAFIGN IS SCIENTOLGOY DEGRE
KEEP UP GOOD POASTIGN!
Confirming people should have voted for Mintrolio.
Force me to abstain from CSM or me just looking at a link and telling CSM to go fuck themselves. I prefer the latter.
BTW… Politics and science should not even be remotely close to each other. The term "political science" is an oxymoron.
You my friend are an idiot.
: the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding
2a : a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study <the science of theology> b : something (as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge <have it down to a science>
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/science
"Knowing" and "Politics" dont belong in the same sentence
Obvious candidate for the feel good degree in said field.
" me just looking at a link and telling CSM to go fuck themselves
Thats why I say introduce a -1 vote to tell that particular candidate to: GO FUCK THEMSELVES
<3
"the 60K accounts that took the time to vote, they are being properly represented. Of the other 340K accounts? Tough shit. They don’t vote, they don’t get represented. It’s as simple as that. Their complaints are moot."
Repeating the most important part.
That statement isn't entirely true. Just because someone voted doesn't mean the candidate they voted for won. So they may not be represented depending on what they are looking for in a csm rep.
" Of the other 340K accounts? Tough shit." Can't really argue with this one though.
how about not confusing voting in a computer game with voting in the real world. Seriously, not everybody (means all the nonvoters) actually wants the dramalama, they don't want to inform themselves on canditates….just because its only a game.
I agree to a point that someone who does not vote has no right to complain about the CSM, but all nonvoters have the right to complain about CCP, if the company which sells a product does not consider the interests of the majority (all nonvoters) of their customers.
Not to mention people like me who think the csm really does nothing. Though I do vote I can understand why some would not. Also it is nothing more than a popularity contest for the most part but I suppose all elections are.
1a. Making a voting age, accounts older than X
1b. Making a minimum active time before vote for older accounts
2. More obvious announcements of upcoming elections such as a login prompt
This would provide the masses with announcements and attempt to curb the voter fraud that is rampant in this game.
Would be amazing if any potential candidate was researched by CCP to see what part of the game they actively participate in and then setting those candidates to an aspect of the game. Would be the only option to ensure all game areas are represented if each aspect was allowed x members, with a few open slots for 'wild card' members.
voting is region based in all other valid forms (RL)
voting is not region based in EVE
Positions should be named and Candidates should pick what spot they want to run for. 1 representative for null, low, high, wormhole, indy, PVP, trade, market (prob a few others) and then the chair.
Problem sovled
Can someone smart explain to me why the goons are posting in that thread endless amounts of tears if the proposed system, whoever strange it may be, don't put them any worse than they are?