Nova, your post sums up my thoughts entirely. The entire STRUCTURE of the CPM is flawed, so how the members are selected is almost a moot point IMO.

I'm interested in more detail on this. Can you clarify?

From my perspective, CPM0 is chosen by CCP, and according to Nova, has a 100% active group and is productive. Nova is happy with the situation as it is at the moment, compared to experiences on the CSM. CPM1+ as it is planned will have elected members, but will otherwise be similar in structure to CPM0. That structure is several (8?, I can't remember) people chosen from the player community who have direct access to the development studio for the purposes of improving the game.

In what way do you believe that it is flawed? How would you change it? Now's the time to speak up, since things are in flux.

This can't be stressed enough. The CPM needs to be beholden to the community it represents.

This can't be stressed enough. The CPM needs to be beholden to the community it represents.

We are in an age of ubiquitous instant communication. It would be non-trivial, but still easy, to set up several CPMs around each issue that needs feedback. A core "generalist" CPM could persist, but I could easily see a Planetary Conquest CPM set up of 20 people and 3 devs with a term of 4 weeks or an EVE Integration CPM of 5 dusters, 5 eve players, and 5 devs that meets 1/month for 2 years.

This is beginning to sound more like a government than an advisory council. Best to keep it simple, in my view.

I think a good compromise would be for CPM members, once elected, to set up focus groups for areas of the product that need work. These groups could be defined however the CPM member wished, but would likely be a selected group of volunteers who have direct experience with the game mechanic in question. The CPM member would chair and manage the focus group, and then present the results to CCP and the rest of the CPM.

In this way, the burden of setting up these groups falls to the players, instead of CCP, who are fairly busy.

can CCP "devs" input something into the game when you first get on that asks you to vote, and only allows you to vote once per account "not character"

I agree with this.

Also, it does sound like a government and that's because it is like a government - a government is a body of people that represents the population of the country; the CPM is a group of people that represent the population of this game. We need ways to make sure the people who are best at representing us are picked, not the people who are best at making friends.

I think a good compromise would be for CPM members, once elected, to set up focus groups for areas of the product that need work. These groups could be defined however the CPM member wished, but would likely be a selected group of volunteers who have direct experience with the game mechanic in question. The CPM member would chair and manage the focus group, and then present the results to CCP and the rest of the CPM.

Use the unique console ID that every ps3 has. One vote per Ps3.

I didn't read through the thread so it may have already been suggested.

This issue is due to a security leak this can now be spoofed.

ok, adding my two cents then,,,

the best way would be some form of real life identification vote, but for a free to play game this has issues...

but just like CPM/CSM give there real names is a great way of weeding out 90% trolls so too would having to give your details to vote...

so maybe only a psn account with a credit card attached to it?

if people get all pissy about it cus they dont have a credit card (they will have to ask mother)

I think that ultimately both the players and CCP must have a reasonable say in who gets into the CPM. Like I mentioned briefly before - allow a more or less free vote (maybe WP restricted or MAC address but the minimum checks really) for the playerbase to select a large pool of candidates that CCP then chooses from by vetting and interviews like they did CPM0. We get to have our say but also CCP can ensure that morons with lots of friends don't get voted into positions they won't be productive in.

And how do you suppose all those players who got the most support would feel if CCP selected 10 candidates that garnered only 100 total votes and didn't select any of the 10 that accumulated 80% of all votes collectively? I like my idea better because it gives us the final say.

Obviously candidates would only get through the player vote if they reached a reasonable percentage of the vote. Now that specific percentage is dependent on the number of applicants and number of positions available but rest assured that CCP would never get the chance to choose someone who only got a tiny number of votes. Otherwise there'd be no point in having the player vote in the first place.

In Eve the CSM applicants have to get a certain number of nominations to become eligible candidates for the vote - this is essentially that idea developed a little.

edit - also, just read through your idea again and it's not too disimilar but I really think the order is important here. If CCP chose the candidates for the election, people would complain that their favourites weren't an option and claim that CCP fixed the whole process by giving us only their favourites to choose from. My way round, no one can really complain.