DUST Search - Election process mecanics thoughts. Discussion welcome.

All Channels

The Council's Chamber

Election process mecanics thoughts. Discussion welcome.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Laurent Cazaderon What The French CRONOS. 1474	Posted - 2013.05.30 09:31:00 - [1] - Quote Hey guys. Here are some thoughts regarding the election process and logistics. This is not a proposition made by CCP but my own thoughts on the matter that i also shared with CCP and now with you. Please feel free to tell me what you think of all this. Everyone votes, no condition. This is the basic democracy but its main flaw is pretty obvious regarding how the PS3 identification for players work and how easy it is to create dozens of accounts. Election would be a race among who has the most active people supporting him and creating multiple accounts to vote over and over and over again. On the other hand, it's probably the simplest process to set in motion and would allow everyone, even a 2 days old player to vote. But is it a good idea ? I dont think so. Time Based requirement to vote Time based would allow to keep newer and misinformed players out of the voting process. That's the main advantage here. It is also what seems to be a very easy system to implement to an election process. Only problem is that this requirement will only limit multi-account for the first year. In fact, even the first election will see people voting with multiple account as many of the active players already have multiple day-one accounts. And as soon as those will now all they need is an old enough account to vote, they will create a lot of them for the second CPM election. And empty accounts only used for CPM election, is bad in many ways. Also, after how long do we consider a player being ready to vote ? 3 month, 6 month, a year ? Even a 3 month old account may in fact be a player with very few knowledge of the game. Definitely, time doesnt seem to be a good criteria to use. WP based requirement to vote This one is very much like the time based requirement but is more rooted into Dust's context. Multi-account voting would require more than just creating an account and using it once a year as you would need to work to get to the WP requirement. It also allows for a more relevant way to decide when a player is ready to vote as WP earned mirrors knowledge of the game far better than for how long a character has existed. ( 250000 WP in a month is worth more than 50 000 WP over 4 month) Still this solution has a downside as well. As soon as the WP requirement for the first election will be known, active players will raise their alt characters to that level over time, expecting to use those to vote multiple times during the first (if doable) or at least the second election. Thus, the WP requirement would need to be raised year after year to avoid people slowly building up many many alt accounts. It would work as a counter measure but hurt new players willing to invest themselves in the entire community mechanics and CPM election as in a few years the WP requirement would be way too high for them to catch up (especially if it grows every year). Conclusion, even if better on paper WP requirement isnt the perfect solution either. In my opinion it should be an addition to whatever the main voting system is. AUR item requirement to vote I really dont like this solution.. but here's a few thoughts anyway. Main advantage is that even with a very cheap AUR item, it would stop many people from voting through multiple accounts. Why ? Because even if the "vote ticket" costs only 5 AUR, you'll still need to buy at least 1.99 euros\dollars or whatever worth of AUR for your alt account. So, those who actually use those alts to play will probably not bother. But they will not create dozens of alt accounts and invest 2 $ on it when they know they wont ever use it again. Though, this analysis is only good until people can transfer AUR from one account to another. Or the AUR item could be expensive, but then it would give a feeling of pay-to-vote, or even worse pay-to-be-elected. And Dust, no CCP, really doesnt need that. Overall, requiring people to pay to get a vote is bad in my opinion. It will raise many many critics on the CPM elections and thus will hurt the CPM action. Real-Life ID verification to vote This is, and i never hid it, the best solution imo to counter people voting multiple times. In Eve, you need a paid account to vote. Or at least if you want to vote multiple times for free, you'll still need one account feeding plex to those alt accounts. The best solution would be to mimic that system in Dust and check people based on their credit card information. No need to pay for anything, CC acts only as a digital ID. Once a person voted using a specific credit card, it registers the information and locks it out of voting. Many ways to do this : - Use Sony's PSN data as Dust is tied to PSN anyway. - Use the EVE web so people can create an account, and tie to their PSN account registering a CC with name, adress etc.. and then voting. Each CC, name etc.. being used to avoid multi-votes - Use a built in web interface inside Dust. It has been done in several video-game (mass effect) and would allow to access a web CCP based UI to use credit card and vote. Now i know what you're gonna say. What about people who dont have a credit card ? I'm gonna be blunt and say that 99.5 % of the players can at least get access to a "friendly" credit card. Aka Mom\Dad if needed. Sure some people may manage to use 2-3 different credit cards from ppl they know but i'm pretty sure that's the most painful way to get access to multiple votes. So, If any of those CC verification is doable, combining this verification process AND a WP based requirement to ensure people voting are both unique and having knowledge of the game would be the ideal system. What do you think guys (and gals) ?
Aeon Amadi Mannar Focused Warfare Gallente Federation 1410	Posted - 2013.05.30 09:52:00 - [2] - Quote Real ID verification. Not like its going to matter. Bigger alliances are just going to stack the election with multiplerepresentatives, same as the CSM
Laurent Cazaderon What The French CRONOS. 1474	Posted - 2013.05.30 09:58:00 - [3] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Real ID verification. Not like its going to matter. Bigger alliances are just going to stack the election with multiplerepresentatives, same as the CSM That's only one part of the election process. Dealing with multi-votes and allowing voting to player with a minimal knowledge of the game. Representation is another debate, that's about the exact form of the election.
Cassonetto Sovrano Hobo's Happy Helpers 0	Posted - 2013.05.30 19:48:00 - [4] - Quote Laurent Cazaderon wrote: WP based requirement to vote Still this solution has a downside as well. As soon as the WP requirement for the first election will be known, active players will raise their alt characters to that level over time, expecting to use those to vote multiple times during the first (if doable) or at least the second election. Thus, the WP requirement would need to be raised year after year to avoid people slowly building up many many alt accounts. It would work as a counter measure but hurt new players willing to invest themselves in the entire community mechanics and CPM election as in a few years the WP requirement would be way too high for them to catch up (especially if it grows every year). I would propose a slight variation; instead of raising the required total WP each year, how about we go by WP earned in the last year? It requires the player to be active, weeds out anybody who just started playing, but doesn't create the long term issues of just raising the cap.
Klivve Cussler S.e.V.e.N. Gentlemen's Agreement 145	Posted - 2013.05.30 20:17:00 - [5] - Quote Cassonetto Sovrano wrote: Laurent Cazaderon wrote: WP based requirement to vote Still this solution has a downside as well. As soon as the WP requirement for the first election will be known, active players will raise their alt characters to that level over time, expecting to use those to vote multiple times during the first (if doable) or at least the second election. Thus, the WP requirement would need to be raised year after year to avoid people slowly building up many many alt accounts. It would work as a counter measure but hurt new players willing to invest themselves in the entire community mechanics and CPM election as in a few years the WP requirement would be way too high for them to catch up (especially if it grows every year). I would propose a slight variation; instead of raising the required total WP each year, how about we go by WP earned in the last year? It requires the player to be active, weeds out anybody who just started playing, but doesn't create the long term issues of just raising the cap. +1 this
Kain Spero Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1500	Posted - 2013.05.30 20:50:00 - [6] - Quote Personally, I'm a very big proponent of active play being the measurement stick used. This is one of the reasons I really want AFK SP and ISK to go away. It could potentially taint the electorate. This is a free to play game and the players that put time and effort into the game create content for those that spend money. This sweat equity should not be overlooked when it come time to create an election process.
Abu Stij Goonfeet 132	Posted - 2013.05.31 02:17:00 - [7] - Quote Oh god no, whoever suggested the Real Life ID & Aurum ideas needs to be told to stop coming up with bad ideas. If you have a voting system that has a benchmark requirement to vote that is say, spitballing here so take it with a pinch of salt, 20mil WarPoints it caters to the players who put effort into the game, and actually care about the "trivial" thing such as a CPM vote. Figuring out the best level to set that bar at is the tricky part.
Terry Webber Turalyon Plus 77	Posted - 2013.05.31 03:07:00 - [8] - Quote Klivve Cussler wrote: Cassonetto Sovrano wrote: Laurent Cazaderon wrote: WP based requirement to vote Still this solution has a downside as well. As soon as the WP requirement for the first election will be known, active players will raise their alt characters to that level over time, expecting to use those to vote multiple times during the first (if doable) or at least the second election. Thus, the WP requirement would need to be raised year after year to avoid people slowly building up many many alt accounts. It would work as a counter measure but hurt new players willing to invest themselves in the entire community mechanics and CPM election as in a few years the WP requirement would be way too high for them to catch up (especially if it grows every year). I would propose a slight variation; instead of raising the required total WP each year, how about we go by WP earned in the last year? It requires the player to be active, weeds out anybody who just started playing, but doesn't create the long term issues of just raising the cap. +1 this I agree. +1, Cassonetto!
Aeon Amadi Mannar Focused Warfare Gallente Federation 1411	Posted - 2013.05.31 04:13:00 - [9] - Quote Abu Stij wrote: Oh god no, whoever suggested the Real Life ID & Aurum ideas needs to be told to stop coming up with bad ideas. If you have a voting system that has a benchmark requirement to vote that is say, spitballing here so take it with a pinch of salt, 20mil WarPoints it caters to the players who put effort into the game, and actually care about the "trivial" thing such as a CPM vote. Figuring out the best level to set that bar at is the tricky part. Problem with that is that it won't deter alternate accounts and it will definitely deter new players. If new players can't vote despite having a good grasp of the game, then they're going to feel singled out. Eve Online has a voting process that includes both but you have to have a paid account in order to vote. Real ID verification and Aurum would prevent Alt-Account spamming and have a definite category of voters, where-as WP Based voting would allow anyone who had spent the time to hit the marker and then just leave the character alone until voting season. Fact is, if they have enough warning, they'll start spamming the WP right now just to hit the marker so they can force the vote. Give me a year to hit 'x' WP with 10 characters and I assure you I'll do it if it means seeing a member of my alliance in the CPM.
Laurent Cazaderon What The French CRONOS. 1479	Posted - 2013.05.31 07:59:00 - [10] - Quote Cassonetto Sovrano wrote: Laurent Cazaderon wrote: WP based requirement to vote Still this solution has a downside as well. As soon as the WP requirement for the first election will be known, active players will raise their alt characters to that level over time, expecting to use those to vote multiple times during the first (if doable) or at least the second election. Thus, the WP requirement would need to be raised year after year to avoid people slowly building up many many alt accounts. It would work as a counter measure but hurt new players willing to invest themselves in the entire community mechanics and CPM election as in a few years the WP requirement would be way too high for them to catch up (especially if it grows every year). I would propose a slight variation; instead of raising the required total WP each year, how about we go by WP earned in the last year? It requires the player to be active, weeds out anybody who just started playing, but doesn't create the long term issues of just raising the cap. Good suggestion dude. I guess it could be done by CCP as a back-end information. Or perhaps add a statistic "this year WP" in the char screen. Would indeed kill one of the issues. Yet, one problem remains : How do you get new motivated players to reach that WP requirement ? And still make it discouraging enough to avoid people farming a lot of voting accounts ? I guess we would need to see average WP earned per month to discuss a number as it's quite difficult without hard data. Abu Stij wrote: Oh god no, whoever suggested the Real Life ID & Aurum ideas needs to be told to stop coming up with bad ideas. If you have a voting system that has a benchmark requirement to vote that is say, spitballing here so take it with a pinch of salt, 20mil WarPoints it caters to the players who put effort into the game, and actually care about the "trivial" thing such as a CPM vote. Figuring out the best level to set that bar at is the tricky part. Voting for CPM shouldnt be restricted to people who care about meta-game or the position itself. It should be opened to anyone who has an interest for the game and enough knowledge to pick out a candidate that promotes specific aspects of the game one would want to see improved or worked on. As for real life ID, it's only a way to avoid elections becoming a race to who's got the largest amount of supporters with alt accounts. A simple fake credit card transaction used to register name and avoid another vote from the same person would work.

Abu Stij Goonfeet 133	Posted - 2013.05.31 15:26:00 - [11] - Quote Laurent Cazaderon wrote: Voting for CPM shouldnt be restricted to people who care about meta-game or the position itself. It should be opened to anyone who has an interest for the game and enough knowledge to pick out a candidate that promotes specific aspects of the game one would want to see improved or worked on. As for real life ID, it's only a way to avoid elections becoming a race to who's got the largest amount of supporters with alt accounts. A simple fake credit card transaction used to register name and avoid another vote from the same person would work. I never said it should only cater to those who care about the meta-game, it should cater to those who actually put in the effort to play the game and care about the game itself. You literally just agreed with what I said in that if anyone is interested in the game enough to vote, should vote. Putting a benchmark/requirement is nothing new, think of it as a "you have to be this old to vote" rule that countries use, its to stop With the Real Life ID format you're basically caching peoples personal credit card info via a company that had that same info stolen previously due to faulty security measures, that doesn't exactly scream "smart idea" at all. Comparing it to EVE is moot because you can keep your account active despite your credit card info being out of date through the secondary market, which isn't even active in DUST. The Aurum tickets could work, but without a secondary market its just a waste of your Aurum and can elections can be bought off by whomever sinks the most real world money on the game which defeats the purpose of trying to "avoid a race to who's got the largest amount of supporters with alt accounts" you're trying to preach against. At present the only logical and sensible idea i a WarPoint based voting requirement as that keeps elections from being "paid for" and promotes players who enjoy the game to get out and vote. Keeping it to one vote per PSN ID is also the best way to curb mass issues with alts. You can keep the requirement not available for the public until a few days before the election to prevent "farming for votes" from happening as well.
sammus420 Goonfeet 80	Posted - 2013.05.31 15:48:00 - [12] - Quote The activity/warpoints earned over a period of time seems the best option. I for one think that any method of verification that requires either a CC# or AUR item is a really, really bad idea, as there are a lot of people, myself included, who never want to have a CC# tied to their PSN. Also, if AUR is required to vote, that would cut out a large potion of the game's population. Plenty of people have zero intent to ever spend a dime on AUR. I 'd be willing to take an uneducated guess that they actually represent the majority of the player base, and we don't want their opinions discounted. I see no reason why CCP should make the minimum warpoints required to vote public knowledge. Combine that with some sort of activity metrics (I'm sure CCP has records of exactly how long we're in battle, how far we travel, how old the account is ect) it shouldn't be hard to build a profile of accounts that aren't actually used to play the game. Also wouldnt the MAC address of the PS3 be an option to limit votes by? 1 vote per PS3.
Abu Stij Goonfeet 133	Posted - 2013.05.31 16:24:00 - [13] - Quote Yeah a minimum "you need to be this active/old to vote" is nothing farfetch'd as well as implementing the accumulated warpoints metric, you could think of it as a "you need to reach this level each year to 're-register' to vote" would be a good way to keep players actively playing the game, as well as make those that see issues, faults, or improvements more likely to want to run for a CPM position as they have more vested interest in the game and its growth. Simply saying "here buy this item with real money to then make your voice heard" is really silly, as is requiring people to provide their credit card information just to vote. Those systems eliminate voters needlessly, despite them being active members of the playerbase.
Daedric Lothar Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 602	Posted - 2013.05.31 18:42:00 - [14] - Quote The others are pretty abusable or limiting. I like WP and R/L verification. For WP, that would be fairly easy to abuse, but it would also make people work for it. Set the limit decently high so that dedicated abuses can only be like 1-10 votes at most. For R/L however some people have alot of credit cards. But I guess its good to limit them to 1-7 votes rather then 3000000 I think that is the best thing, is just try to limit these people to as few votes as possible. You won't be able to stop fraud, but if you get a core group of bandits who want to mess up the system and if there are 50 of them and they all vote 10 times, thats only 500 votes rather then like 1,000-5,000 votes.
Klivve Cussler S.e.V.e.N. Gentlemen's Agreement 149	Posted - 2013.05.31 19:15:00 - [15] - Quote I think that we're never going to get a verifiable 1 vote per RL person. Even in Eve, the vote is 1 per non-trial account, and some people are running 8 or more accounts. Those people, theoretically, have 8 votes, if I'm not mistaken. I think the goal should be to keep people from spamming votes. While it is possible for people to have 8-10 votes in Eve, it isn't common, and no one has 80, 800, or 8000 votes. Straight voting on PSN accounts allows for spamming huge numbers of votes with little effort. The WP/year requirement does not eliminate multiple votes per person, but it makes it difficult to spam huge numbers of votes. I also think that the purchasable citizenship has some merit, but I don't think it should be AUR only. I think that an Isk option, say 2,000,000 Isk, would provide an equivalent "alt speedbump" to a 5-10 Aur option. The problem with this option, however, is that as soon as player-player isk transfers are enabled, a rich player can enfranchise several other accounts. This problem is similar to playing an alt enough that it has enough WP to vote, but the isk option may not require the same time commitment. Either method, however, should provide enough of a barrier to prevent a player from spamming an election with hundreds of votes.
Abu Stij Goonfeet 133	Posted - 2013.05.31 20:42:00 - [16] - Quote Daedric Lothar wrote: The others are pretty abusable or limiting. I like WP and R/L verification. For WP, that would be fairly easy to abuse, but it would also make people work for it. Set the limit decently high so that dedicated abuses can only be like 1-10 votes at most. For R/L however some people have alot of credit cards. But I guess its good to limit them to 1-7 votes rather then 3000000 I think that is the best thing, is just try to limit these people to as few votes as possible. You won't be able to stop fraud, but if you get a core group of bandits who want to mess up the system and if there are 50 of them and they all vote 10 times, thats only 500 votes rather then like 1,000-5,000 votes. The key issue, as previously pointed, out with linking a credit card with someones account is, you're essentially making the purpose of a Free-to-Play game obsolete. Additionally there are security concerns people will raise and could exploit at greater damage. The WarPoint system at least is a more of a "you really have to actually play the game" speed bump to get people to spam votes and I said previously is more of a hindrance for the people making all those alts just to vote as they're taking time away from their focus on their main. Klivve Cussler wrote: I think that we're never going to get a verifiable 1 vote per RL person. Even in Eve, the vote is 1 per non-trial account, and some people are running 8 or more accounts. Those people, theoretically, have 8 votes, if I'm not mistaken. I think the goal should be to keep people from spamming votes. While it is possible for people to have 8-10 votes in Eve, it isn't common, and no one has 80, 800, or 8000 votes. Straight voting on PSN accounts allows for spamming huge numbers of votes with little effort. The WP/year requirement does not eliminate multiple votes per person, but it makes it difficult to spam huge numbers of votes. I also think that the purchasable citizenship has some merit, but I don't think it should be AUR only. I think that an Isk option, say 2,000,000 Isk, would provide an equivalent "alt speedbump" to a 5-10 Aur option. The problem with this option, however, is that as soon as player-player isk transfers are enabled, a rich player can enfranchise several other accounts. This problem is similar to playing an alt enough that it has enough WP to vote, but the isk option may not require the same time commitment. Either method, however, should provide enough of a barrier to prevent a player from spamming an election with hundreds of votes. You're not mistaken, people with multiple active subscriptions can make multiple votes and they count. That isn't a bad thing, since they're paying to play the game (which is a subscription based model) and actively playing it during the time of voting. Its open to manipulation but at the cost of $15/per vote from those people. DUST is a Free-To-Play game and the problem with a "purchasable citizenship", even through ISK instead of Aurum, is that you can just have someone give money to those who don't have that ISK through a secondary market when it becomes active. It eliminates the point in having it almost immediately since people can make alts, then have those alts get the ISK/AUR immediately just to spam votes as soon as the secondary market is in effect which is supposedly sometime soon(tm) and a key component to this game.
Cassonetto Sovrano Hobo's Happy Helpers 1	Posted - 2013.05.31 21:04:00 - [17] - Quote Laurent Cazaderon wrote: Good suggestion dude. I guess it could be done by CCP as a back-end information. Or perhaps add a statistic "this year WP" in the char screen. Would indeed kill one of the issues. Yet, one problem remains : How do you get new motivated players to reach that WP requirement ? And still make it discouraging enough to avoid people farming a lot of voting accounts ? I guess we would need to see average WP earned per month to discuss a number as it's quite difficult without hard data. No need to reinvent the wheel. CCP dumps the players names and their total WP into a spreadsheet at the time of the election. The next year, they collect the data again, but subtract the WP that existed for each player from the year before. All that's left will be the WP earned since the data was last collected. As far as what the benchmark should actually be, I would suggest CCP determine the average total WP of all players, then cut that number in half. For future elections that value should be based on WP earned in the last year, not overall total. I think that should be a high enough hurdle to keep out spammers and rookies. However, I don't think that should be the only requirement. One vote per PSN ID is a no brainer, and if CCP can make it 1 vote per PS3, I would be in favor of that as well; I know it could be an issue for a few people, but the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, and most of us won't be sharing a PS3 with another Dust player. Also, for reasons others have mentioned, I am completely opposed to using credit card info as identification. I don't like basing it off of Aurrum either, but it doesn't make my skin crawl as much as giving up my card info.
IMPAIRS YOUR ABILITY Goonfeet 31	Posted - 2013.05.31 22:11:00 - [18] - Quote sammus420 wrote: The activity/warpoints earned over a period of time seems the best option. ...... Also wouldnt the MAC address of the PS3 be an option to limit votes by? 1 vote per PS3. This seems the best solution in conjunction with a WP standard, while some people have multiple PS3 it would certainly limit any abuse to an acceptable minimum.
Terry Webber Turalyon Plus 90	Posted - 2013.06.03 17:13:00 - [19] - Quote Cassonetto Sovrano wrote: Laurent Cazaderon wrote: Good suggestion dude. I guess it could be done by CCP as a back-end information. Or perhaps add a statistic "this year WP" in the char screen. Would indeed kill one of the issues. Yet, one problem remains : How do you get new motivated players to reach that WP requirement ? And still make it discouraging enough to avoid people farming a lot of voting accounts ? I guess we would need to see average WP earned per month to discuss a number as it's quite difficult without hard data. No need to reinvent the wheel. CCP dumps the players names and their total WP into a spreadsheet at the time of the election. The next year, they collect the data again, but subtract the WP that existed for each player from the year before. All that's left will be the WP earned since the data was last collected. As far as what the benchmark should actually be, I would suggest CCP determine the average total WP of all players, then cut that number in half. For future elections that value should be based on WP earned in the last year, not overall total. I think that should be a high enough hurdle to keep out spammers and rookies. However, I don't think that should be the only requirement. One vote per PSN ID is a no brainer, and if CCP can make it 1 vote per PS3, I would be in favor of that as well; I know it could be an issue for a few people, but the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, and most of us won't be sharing a PS3 with another Dust player. Also, for reasons others have mentioned, I am completely opposed to using credit card info as identification. I don't like basing it off of Aurrum either, but it doesn't make my skin crawl as much as giving up my card info. I completely agree with your thoughts. +1
xaerael Kabiel Goonfeet 133	Posted - 2013.06.03 23:13:00 - [20] - Quote Average WP per month over X months (6?) prior to elections. Would make it so only current active players can vote. "New guys" wouldn't be able to vote, but then... there's usually an age limit on voting in the real world! Only downside would be super-try-hards might be able to squeeze an extra vote or two off their alts, but if it's balanced well, that pool of people would be pretty small.

Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 4856	Posted - 2013.06.04 03:37:00 - [21] - Quote For those of you wondering I am also in favor of active player voting however it has to be an decent metric that a new player who is active and old enough. However I see a few drawbacks such as older players who took a vacation during the summer get disenfranchised.
mrunknown2u2 Ill Omens EoN. 46	Posted - 2013.06.04 04:22:00 - [22] - Quote I'd say none the csm are a waste of time and proved time and time Again not to be of any real value. I totally against they csm they are all self serving the next and best vote will be to do away with the whole thing.
Abu Stij Goonfeet 144	Posted - 2013.06.04 10:25:00 - [23] - Quote mrunknown2u2 wrote: I'd say none the csm are a waste of time and proved time and time Again not to be of any real value. I totally against they csm they are all self serving the next and best vote will be to do away with the whole thing. You'll probably need to find a new game as CCP doesn't plan to remove the CPM, nor the CSM, anytime soon. Additionally please, provide evidence in your own thread that the CPM/CSM are only self serving their own corps interests.
Thanos Warpfiend HongKong n Shanghai Merc Corp 5	Posted - 2013.06.04 12:55:00 - [24] - Quote 1 vote per 3 million SP you have
Abu Stij Goonfeet 144	Posted - 2013.06.04 13:53:00 - [25] - Quote Thanos Warpfiend wrote: 1 vote per 3 million SP you have That doesn't really work at all and is full of issues.
Temba Fusrodah Ganksters Inc Drake Ashigaru 3	Posted - 2013.06.05 11:47:00 - [26] - Quote Wow so many ideas on how to create an elitist voting regime, this is a free to play game correct? I have played EVE long enough to know and realize whatever tricks you are trying to implement or avoid someone will figure out how to get an advantage from it. The bottom line don't be overly cute here, if you play you get to vote, if you are nerd enough to set up 50 psn accounts well you get fifty votes. Do not ask me for my credit card info after both EVE and Dust514 recently suffered a ddos attack, PSN has a bad reputation and I buy the PSN cards at the store so they do not have my cc info in their system. The war point idea is so bad .... let's say i play one day a week cuz i have a real life .... i should have no vote because someone else has 7 hours a day he can play? Time to employ Occam's Razor, among competing hypotheses, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be selected. Just let players with accounts vote, end of story. Power To The Players!
Thanos Warpfiend HongKong n Shanghai Merc Corp 8	Posted - 2013.06.05 15:16:00 - [27] - Quote Abu Stij wrote: Thanos Warpfiend wrote: 1 vote per 3 million SP you have That doesn't really work at all and is full of issues. Like an unemployed stripper?
Appia Vibbia Purgatorium of the Damned League of Infamy 39	Posted - 2013.06.05 16:42:00 - [28] - Quote I say time based. make sure someone has been posting on the forums for 2 months. Definitely need to make sure the people use the forums as a qualifier for knowing what is going on. I've had so many talks with players about hearsay. One guy last night just quoted a forum post I made without knowing it came from me, because it was second-hand information.
Hobo on Fire Goonfeet 4	Posted - 2013.06.05 19:14:00 - [29] - Quote Temba Fusrodah wrote: Wow so many ideas on how to create an elitist voting regime, this is a free to play game correct? The war point idea is so bad .... let's say i play one day a week cuz i have a real life .... i should have no vote because someone else has 7 hours a day he can play? Someone who plays Dust for 7 hours a day is will spend 7 hours a day dealing with the actions of CCP, which could be highly affected by elected CPM members. That doesn't mean you don't get to vote, it just means they matter more than you. Simply put: Temba Fusrodah wrote: Power To The Players! Players being the people who play the game. For the record, if you play one day a week (and aren't just sitting AFK in the MCC) I think you should be able to meet the WP requirement.
Abu Stij Goonfeet 151	Posted - 2013.06.05 19:32:00 - [30] - Quote Appia Vibbia wrote: I say time based. make sure someone has been posting on the forums for 2 months. Definitely need to make sure the people use the forums as a qualifier for knowing what is going on. I've had so many talks with players about hearsay. One guy last night just quoted a forum post I made without knowing it came from me, because it was second-hand information. The issue with a "time based" account needed to vote is, it does nothing really to curb the "alt vote" which would throw off the entire election process.



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.