CSM8 voting is finally open for business! The first round of voting is over. Nearly all of the candidates received the 200 votes needed to make the final ballot. Among those eliminated were some dyed-in-the-wool carebear candidates, so I'm happy about that. Turnout for the first round of voting was dreadfully low, but that may be a result of voters assuming that the candidates would easily clear the 200-vote hurdle. Hopefully turnout for the real vote will be much higher. Due to the drop in people running, there will be 31 candidates fighting it out to win 14 seats. In other words, 45% of the candidates will win.
Here's the link to the page where you can vote. You'll need to log into your account at that website to cast your ballot. Remember that if you own multiple accounts, you can cast multiple votes.
As you can see from the sample picture above, you select your candidates in order of preference through drag-and-drop. As you fill each row, another will appear, and you can vote for up to 14 candidates. If you're feeling lazy, you can vote for just one, or a few candidates.
It's impossible to predict how someone will perform (or not perform) on the CSM once elected. It's fair to say that some CSM members will pleasantly surprise us, while others will prove to be disappointments. Putting those caveats aside, here's a guide to help you select candidates for the CSM.
CANDIDATES TO VOTE FOR
Psychotic Monk is running on a highsec PvP platform. He favors emergent gameplay, which roughly translates into killing carebears for fun. If you support Psychotic Monk, I would strongly recommend that you place him in the #1 position on your ballot, as he's not a member of a large alliance and will need all the votes he can get.
Malcanis understands that risk/reward is badly broken, and I look forward to seeing him make that case on the CSM. I imagine he'll be diplomatic in the beginning, but over time, will allow his abrasive personality to shine through as he deals with carebears on the CSM.
Mynnna is very aware of the brokenness of the current highsec/nullsec dynamic. He's considered the foremost expert on the EVE economy, and is probably one of only a handful of players whose expertise CCP may defer to. Mynnna has also donated billions of isk to the New Order, which suggests he's not opposed to emergent gameplay in highsec.
Chitsa Jason is the best of the wormhole candidates, from what I've seen. For those of you who are voting a wormhole slate in the top 5 spots, I would encourage you to put Chitsa in the top position.
To fill out the remainder of your ballot, the following candidates are also highly qualified, have not bought into the carebear agenda that I'm aware of, and stand a reasonable chance of winning a CSM seat:
Cipreh (also a wormhole candidate)
CANDIDATES NOT TO VOTE FOR
Given that 45% of the candidates will win CSM seats, several of the following will end up on the CSM anyway, but the only way you can express your dissatisfaction is by filling up your ballot with people who aren't them. These are the worst of the worst:
Trebor Daehdoow, who is running for reelection, has proposed boosting EVE subscriptions by getting rid of non-consensual wardecs--which he refers to as a nothing more than a "griefing mechanic". Simply disgusting.
Ripard Teg loves to waffle, but not enough to prevent airing out some dreadful views about the game. He's "undecided" on whether to outlaw non-consensual wardecs, but has gone on the record in favor of "isk tanking" (more on that later), and favors nerfing the suicide ganking of certain industrial ships. Because ganking hasn't been nerfed enough yet.
Mike Azariah is also on the record in favor of nerfing suicide ganking. Ridiculous.
Nathan Jameson is probably the worst of the wormhole candidates. I get kind of a Ripard-esque vibe off of him. I hope I'm wrong, but why take the chance?
riverini made headlines last time he ran, because he thought CCP's top priority should be Incarna and clothing removal.
The following candidates must be considered "bad" because they favor "isk tanking". This is a severe nerf of suicide ganking in which a ganker must not be able to inflict damage greater than the value of his own gank ship, or must not be able to make a profit on ganking under any circumstance. This discredited view of ganking ignores the extreme variance of ship EHP when tanked or untanked, the extreme variance of gank cost when using different numbers of gankers, and the extreme variance of loot potential. It also assumes gank victims have no responsibility to defend themselves or avoid attack:
MOTIVATION TO VOTE
I still haven't seen signs of CCP's promised get-out-the-vote hooplah, so I suppose I'll need to take matters into my own hands. A feast for the eyes:
Now do your duty and vote. Here's the link again, in case you don't want to scroll up. Every vote counts.