Tuesday 3 May 2016

Democracy is the worst form of selecting player representatives, except for all the others.

I have a plan.
  • I love the idea of player representation bringing ideas, thoughts and fears to CCP.  
  • We know in huge groups there is a low 'signal to noise' ratio.  Somewhere between 10 and 20 people still make a very large group on a day to day basis, but we probably need this many pilots to represent diverse groups
  • CCP should talk to this group 'in confidence'.  Nothing earth shattering if it gets leaked, but still sanctionable if someone should step too far out of line.  It doesn't matter the game, there is always the 'but you promised me a pony' crowd to upset.  Making a pony is hard, and not all attempts work out.
  • The largest groups in the game should have people stand up to represent them.  Some of these groups are called 'bears', others have less savoury names.
  • Democracy is a the worst way to elect representatives, except for all the others.  (Well, you could vote me in as benevolent dictator, but I am not entirely sure I would return the favour)
If other players see the value in such an organisation, they should support it, and support the candidates.  I know that such an event will be work, and tempers will be exposed, and sometimes people will get inappropriately passionate about this game.  I still support such a body.

Some are even asking that the 85% be represented on such a body.

I might even call this body the Council of Stellar Management.  However the name is unimportant. The number of seats or length of service are also less important than giving the feedback.

I ran for CSM.  Other very worthy highsec and lowsec candidates of various stripes spring to mind. Steve of course who was elected.  I thought other candidates here were also worthy; ranging from bear though lowsec pirate, all the way to highsec wardeccer.

High and lowsec had an opportunity to have more voices.  My initial response to seeing this year's representation was ... to use an eve phrase: salty.  I would love to see a wider representation this year's CSM, and I suspect CCP would too.  If you want a better representation, promote the best candidate you see, or even better run for yourself.

Sorry Rixx, if you read this, reserving votes for some sections of the game won't work.  I might prefer different results for the CSM, but highsec has 85% of the population, and lowsec has been well represented in the past.  Carving off quota's either ends up where 3% of the voters get 30% of the representatives, or it ends up being meta-gamed into pointlessness.  I do endorse one thing though:
In addition CCP needs to help bring the election to the game itself. An active and participatory player base is good for everyone. So I'd like to see more log-in screen support, in-game notifications, billboard and hangar ads, etc., next year.  I want voting for player representing groups to be an 'in game' activity.

Highsec, lowsec and even WH groups can be motivated, and it is up to the bloggers, the FC's, alliance leads and redditors, even the forum posters.  This is a sandbox.  Go build a castle and put 'eve is great' advertising on it.

I want contstructive criticism of the CSM and CCP.  Shine a light on interesting decisions.  There is a however a difference between 'this group can't be all things to all people' and 'all player representation is evil'.  I don't even care if commentators on EVE get it right, as usually even the worst critic's have an element of truth.  If you claim that someone/something will get an unreasonable nerf or buff, you may be right.  If you claim that the sky is going to fall because of it, I want to see compelling evidence.

Where the opportunity exists for me to affect the game in a positive way in the future, I will endeavour to take it.  This includes my blog, and my time, and using the contacts I have made through this CSM attempt.

As usual, I will do what I can, with what I have, where I am.

P.S.  The last few years, CSM released the STV results themselves.  I have not seen them this year.  I would like to peruse those particular tea leaves if anyone has the link.


  1. "P.S. The last few years, CSM released the STV results themselves. I have not seen them this year. I would like to peruse those particular tea leaves if anyone has the link."

    I've posted 2 twitter comments on this.

    If I don't see a response by tomorrow, I think I'll be rabble rousing out on Reddit.

  2. For a constructive approach how to fix voter apathy, I will have to re-link my post from 2 years ago. Read it with tongue in cheek, read it and find your Churchill quote but I do believe some of it could be a path forward. https://splatus.wordpress.com/2014/05/17/voter-apathy/

  3. Thanks for the link to my post - we are the 85%! I generally agree with your perspective on the CSM. I hope CCP takes steps to get the broad range of input they need from the entire player community.

    1. Ccp can bring csm into the game and into lore. However it is those reading posts like these at need to spruik any player rep body.

    2. Ccp can bring csm into the game and into lore. However it is those reading posts like these at need to spruik any player rep body.

  4. Last year the voting information took something like 2 weeks after fanfest to get public.
    Just a shame that 99.9% of high sec does not care enough to get involved!

    1. ok just checked back on my blog. Keynote announcement was 19th March 2015, voting data released 27th March..... so just over one week.

  5. I'm sorry you didn't get on.

    Name recognition counts for a lot, if you run again next year you will have a better chance.

    Didn't Mike run about 3 times before he got in? Maybe I'm misremembering that.

    1. I will run for the next council

    2. I will run for the next council


Posts older than 14 days are subject to moderation before being published. I do so sporadically. If you have a question regarding older posts, also evemail dotoo foo.

Blogger comments supports basic html. You can make a link 'clicky' by <a href="http://yoursite/yourpage">yoursite/yourpage</a>

While I currently accept anonymous users, please include a pseudonym. I get confused answering anonymous.

If the word verification is preventing you from adding a comment, please evemail DoToo Foo for alternative methods