Jump to content

Ok, real talk. Player/Alliance votes


Buorhann
 Share

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

You guys are always falling back on this.  Like, seriously, over 80% of the replies has some petty passive aggressive jab about "OH YOU WANT THE WIN WAAAH".

I personally care less about the current votes.  I'm looking forward to next years.  This year is already screwed.  Let it go.

We've seen in the past how silly it can be, and we've seen now how silly it can be.

I've been on your side of the argument before and with the current way how voting is, I'm still on that side, however - you dumbasses are making it so very hard to support.  Seriously, some of you  go "We've been avoiding the forums" but now?   On voting, you're not avoiding the forums?  So weird.  Like you guys could've just mass voted as usual, then remained  quiet, and just watch the salt and enjoy the drama with some popcorn, but no...

Don't get me wrong though, I'm enjoying this to some extent, but I wish all of you whiners and salt miners would've kept your cancerous posts in the other threads where it was already occurring.

You're lucky I already used my down vote for the day. It's okay, I got you tomorrow though. 

Okay, you people keep saying you don't care about the votes.. Then what was all the complaining about? That shows that you do indeed care. You wouldn't have made this thread trying to find a solution if you didn't care, so don't sit there and lie and pretend you don't care when, deep down, it is eating at your very soul. 

Well what do you expect when there was a potential threat of all our votes being nullified and discounted? Obviously we're going to fight back, so don't act like you wouldn't do the same, because you would and you have and you do. 

Ah, so the ones who started this whole argument whining and crying with salt like the entitled and spoiled little brats you are about the votes being rigged are going to now back away and start calling us the whiners and salt miners? That's typical behavior of a spoiled baby, who for once in his life, doesn't get things his way. You can kiss my ass you hypocrite. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

"I VM due to timezone differences" -Reuben Cheuk

 

timezoneVM.jpg.64e93c4270b92d26e0ac30572d9351eb.jpg 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Curufinwe
32 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

You guys are always falling back on this.  Like, seriously, over 80% of the replies has some petty passive aggressive jab about "OH YOU WANT THE WIN WAAAH".

I personally care less about the current votes.  I'm looking forward to next years.  This year is already screwed.  Let it go.

We've seen in the past how silly it can be, and we've seen now how silly it can be.

I've been on your side of the argument before and with the current way how voting is, I'm still on that side, however - you dumbasses are making it so very hard to support.  Seriously, some of you  go "We've been avoiding the forums" but now?   On voting, you're not avoiding the forums?  So weird.  Like you guys could've just mass voted as usual, then remained  quiet, and just watch the salt and enjoy the drama with some popcorn, but no...

Don't get me wrong though, I'm enjoying this to some extent, but I wish all of you whiners and salt miners would've kept your cancerous posts in the other threads where it was already occurring.

Whatever your intentions, I think the issue is a lot of people find the timing of your thread rather suspect.  After all, if people had legitimate concerns about the way in which the voting was structured, this is a conversation that should have been had prior to the vote, not after it had already begun.  Moreover, given that we've used the same voting system since at least 2015, a lot of people find it suspect that EMC affliated people (like yourself) are suddenly chiming in with suggestions to 'fix' the system.  I mean, I really don't recall a lot of objections being raised by you or other Syndi-OO posters when your bloc (our bloc at the time) swept the awards in 2016, so coming out now in favour of a dramatically revamped system is going to raise a lot of eyebrows and cause people to question your motives.  Add to that the fact our members are actually paying attention to this subforum now (you're welcome, organizers) and you're going to see some blowback on what strikes a lot of people as an attempt to retroactively delegitimize a democratic vote.

31 minutes ago, Mayor said:

I think it would be better to just have public votes and then weed out the self-voting guys. I mean I voted NPO for best Economic System because honestly it works. Their growth is good and their system stops me from raiding them. I voted Rose for most powerful, and obviously Arrgh for most immoral. If it was public my self votes could be seen and removed. We could also do it in a way that if I *wanted* to vote Arrgh then I'd better have a good reason/description to back-up my self-vote (this would go in the thread I guess). This would take a while going through the votes individually though and adds more work to an already boring task.

Well, first, this:

16 minutes ago, Who Me said:

These polls are popularity contests, why shouldn't you be able to vote for yourself or your alliance?

And second, and perhaps more importantly, who exactly is going to decide whether a self vote is legitimate or not?  We already have one example of an organizer (Hope) actively advocating for a candidate in the poll they are running, as well another (Zeebrus) who proposed that the voting should be scrapped entirely because the "rightful" people weren't getting enough votes.  No offence, but I'm not sure I'd want to trust vote vetting responsibility to a lot of people in PW, since it requires a degree of detachment and nonpartisanship that many people seem unable to acheive.  Requiring votes to be both public and vetted gives far too much power over the outcome of the poll to the people counting the votes, which is exactly why RL democracies use a secret ballot system.  If people disagree on who is most deserving of an award, let them marshal support to back their favoured candidate - don't try to force your preferences of what constitutes a 'right' or 'wrong' choice on others just because you don't agree with their reasoning.

 

Edited by Curufinwe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear BK, NPO, and friends, Roq already said you guys decided to invite your players to vote and you suggested certain players/alliances because you want to win, the awards are a powerfull weapon to recruit players that are more likely to join the alliance of the year or the alliance with the best growth, and another reason was because in the past you think other alliances did the same

Now read my virtual lips, this is not the problem, people are mad because you did it in the worng way, you did it in a disrespectful way

First because you said that these awards means nothing but you put effort to win them, so it sounds like an edgy 14 years old at his first internet trolling, it sounds like you wanted to sabotage this and not winning this, like "haha EMC this year you get nothing, no fun this year"

Second because you voted dumb options like Jacktop for best avatar when he has no avatar, this is why people think you wanted to sabotage the awards, because sure you can find a good avatar to vote in your coalition, but mass voting those options makes us believe that you didn't just want to win, you don't even care who wins

Third how you voted, all the votes in almost all the categories to one single player/alliance, a big giant !@#$ you to who has put effort to make this, look at the old awards and how they are more balanced, because voting for you own alliance insead of voting for the alliance who most deserve the award is a thing but voting only one alliance in your coalition and ignoring the others is a different thing, why voting Acadia for Most Likely to Succeed (random example) if you are from Zodiac, NPO, or BK? Makes no sense, what we get from this is that you wanted to give something to everyone in the coalition so you selected bad options just for that, so now on one side Zodiac is the best alliance for new players and in the other hand only 1.77% of the voters think that Guardians of the Galaxy is good if you are a new player (another random example)

You want to win the alliance of the year? Ok, a good way to "fix" the result is to reach the last days with a situation like:

NPO 16%

Rose 15%

TKR 13%

BK 13%

And in the last 2-3 days send some of your players to vote and end like:

NPO 19%

BK 16%

Rose 14%

TKR 13%

Do you think someone would get mad for those results? No, because it doesen't sound fixed, it doesen't sound an insult to the people who made this, it doesen't sound an insult to the other people who voted

It's not what you did, it's how you did it

Not that I disliked these days of madness, but that's just me being a shitposter

Then if you really wanted to ruin the fun and be the bad guys once again, buy military and start another war, just give to Alex 3-4 days to be ready with some new war mechanic to add at the last second and some server crash at the update, we like traditions

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Who Me said:

These polls are popularity contests, why shouldn't you be able to vote for yourself or your alliance?

In it's current state, I agree.  As Curu pointed out in his long winded reply to me, sure, it's suspect that I'm looking for solutions to "fix" it, but who else is going to?  You guys in IQsphere?  No.  New leaders of EMCsphere?  No.  The current organizers of the votes?  So far I haven't seen any proposals to it  other than wiping the votes (Silly to do that).  Anyone else?  No.

This thread was started to generate discussion on possible solutions.  Yet, despite me having a good conversation with @Edward I, a lot of you just wanted to contribute cancerous posts.  Which is funny, because some of them involve people going "Oh you're EMC affiliated, you just want to win".  No.   No where have I stated I give a damn about these current votes.  No where have I stated I gave a shit about winning.  In fact, I don't know if I actually endorsed anybody beyond my original nominations this year (Which was slathered with a bunch of "N/A").

I was one of the first few folks who organized mass voting to generate salty tears from people on these awards.  Why would I give a shit about this years?  I'll tell you, because other players honestly care about the voting.  I may be EMC affiliated.  Hell, I helped build it.   But that doesn't take away the fact that I've worked with people of all directions and politics in this game.  Beyond that though, I actually give a shit about the community.  So I started a thread that no one else did in hopes of generating discussion.

 

16 minutes ago, element85 said:

You're lucky I already used my down vote for the day. It's okay, I got you tomorrow though. 

Okay, you people keep saying you don't care about the votes.. Then what was all the complaining about? That shows that you do indeed care. You wouldn't have made this thread trying to find a solution if you didn't care, so don't sit there and lie and pretend you don't care when, deep down, it is eating at your very soul. 

Well what do you expect when there was a potential threat of all our votes being nullified and discounted? Obviously we're going to fight back, so don't act like you wouldn't do the same, because you would and you have and you do. 

Ah, so the ones who started this whole argument whining and crying with salt like the entitled and spoiled little brats you are about the votes being rigged are going to now back away and start calling us the whiners and salt miners? That's typical behavior of a spoiled baby, who for once in his life, doesn't get things his way. You can kiss my ass you hypocrite. 

 

Cool story.

I don't know who you are, but please tell me where in your genius capability where I gave a shit about the current votes.  And no, I really don't give a !@#$.  You don't know me.  However, a lot of people do care about the votes.  They assumed that things would change without discussing it beforehand.  Their folly.

Also, why the hell do you keep saying "you people" on me?  Go on and look through the current threads and please point out where I'm whining about the votes right now.  You won't find one, but if you do look - at least it'll help with your lack of reading comprehension or lack of attention awareness when replying to certain individuals.

I started this thread to generate discussion because the community cares, and I had a honest to good discussion going on with a IQsphere affiliated person (Just pointing out that people on opposing sides can actually have a good conversation) until people like you (On both sides) decided to spread the cancer around.

 

But please, go dig through all my posts on these voting threads and see how much of a hypocrite I am that you labeled me as such in your ignorance.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Micchan said:

Dear BK, NPO, and friends, Roq already said you guys decided to invite your players to vote and you suggested certain players/alliances because you want to win, the awards are a powerfull weapon to recruit players that are more likely to join the alliance of the year or the alliance with the best growth, and another reason was because in the past you think other alliances did the same

BINGO.. SUGGESTED. KEYWORD, SUGGESTED.... Defined as "put forward for consideration" .... Big difference in being suggested vs forced. Like I've been saying, no one put a gun to my head and no one voted for me or told me who I have to vote for. I voted for my choice and my choice alone. Just because my choices may or may not have matched what was suggested means absolutely nothing. And we think? We think other alliances did the same? THEY FREAKING ADMITTED TO IT FFS!! 

3 minutes ago, Micchan said:

Dear BK, NPO, and friends, Roq already said you guys decided to invite your players to vote and you suggested certain players/alliances because you want to win, the awards are a powerfull weapon to recruit players that are more likely to join the alliance of the year or the alliance with the best growth, and another reason was because in the past you think other alliances did the same

Now read my virtual lips, this is not the problem, people are mad because you did it in the worng way, you did it in a disrespectful way

First because you said that these awards means nothing but you put effort to win them, so it sounds like an edgy 14 years old at his first internet trolling, it sounds like you wanted to sabotage this and not winning this, like "haha EMC this year you get nothing, no fun this year"

Second because you voted dumb options like Jacktop for best avatar when he has no avatar, this is why people think you wanted to sabotage the awards, because sure you can find a good avatar to vote in your coalition, but mass voting those options makes us believe that you didn't just want to win, you don't even care who wins

Third how you voted, all the votes in almost all the categories to one single player/alliance, a big giant !@#$ you to who has put effort to make this, look at the old awards and how they are more balanced, because voting for you own alliance insead of voting for the alliance who most deserve the award is a thing but voting only one alliance in your coalition and ignoring the others is a different thing, why voting Acadia for Most Likely to Succeed (random example) if you are from Zodiac, NPO, or BK? Makes no sense, what we get from this is that you wanted to give something to everyone in the coalition so you selected bad options just for that, so now on one side Zodiac is the best alliance for new players and in the other hand only 1.77% of the voters think that Guardians of the Galaxy is good if you are a new player (another random example)

You want to win the alliance of the year? Ok, a good way to "fix" the result is to reach the last days with a situation like:

NPO 16%

Rose 15%

TKR 13%

BK 13%

And in the last 2-3 days send some of your players to vote and end like:

NPO 19%

BK 16%

Rose 14%

TKR 13%

Do you think someone would get mad for those results? No, because it doesen't sound fixed, it doesen't sound an insult to the people who made this, it doesen't sound an insult to the other people who voted

It's not what you did, it's how you did it

Not that I disliked these days of madness, but that's just me being a shitposter

Then if you really wanted to ruin the fun and be the bad guys once again, buy military and start another war, just give to Alex 3-4 days to be ready with some new war mechanic to add at the last second and some server crash at the update, we like traditions

I find it funny that you're trying to give people strategies on how to do something that you're crying about them doing?? So wait, it would be okay to you if your people only lost by 1-3 % ? Is that what this is about? That's a sore loser, which is defined as a person who becomes very upset or angry when he or she loses a game, contest, etc., exactly what you've been doing. 

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 4

"I VM due to timezone differences" -Reuben Cheuk

 

timezoneVM.jpg.64e93c4270b92d26e0ac30572d9351eb.jpg 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Curufinwe
8 minutes ago, Micchan said:

Dear BK, NPO, and friends, Roq already said you guys decided to invite your players to vote and you suggested certain players/alliances because you want to win, the awards are a powerfull weapon to recruit players that are more likely to join the alliance of the year or the alliance with the best growth, and another reason was because in the past you think other alliances did the same

Now read my virtual lips, this is not the problem, people are mad because you did it in the worng way, you did it in a disrespectful way

First because you said that these awards means nothing but you put effort to win them, so it sounds like an edgy 14 years old at his first internet trolling, it sounds like you wanted to sabotage this and not winning this, like "haha EMC this year you get nothing, no fun this year"

Second because you voted dumb options like Jacktop for best avatar when he has no avatar, this is why people think you wanted to sabotage the awards, because sure you can find a good avatar to vote in your coalition, but mass voting those options makes us believe that you didn't just want to win, you don't even care who wins

Third how you voted, all the votes in almost all the categories to one single player/alliance, a big giant !@#$ you to who has put effort to make this, look at the old awards and how they are more balanced, because voting for you own alliance insead of voting for the alliance who most deserve the award is a thing but voting only one alliance in your coalition and ignoring the others is a different thing, why voting Acadia for Most Likely to Succeed (random example) if you are from Zodiac, NPO, or BK? Makes no sense, what we get from this is that you wanted to give something to everyone in the coalition so you selected bad options just for that, so now on one side Zodiac is the best alliance for new players and in the other hand only 1.77% of the voters think that Guardians of the Galaxy is good if you are a new player (another random example)

You want to win the alliance of the year? Ok, a good way to "fix" the result is to reach the last days with a situation like:

NPO 16%

Rose 15%

TKR 13%

BK 13%

And in the last 2-3 days send some of your players to vote and end like:

NPO 19%

BK 16%

Rose 14%

TKR 13%

Do you think someone would get mad for those results? No, because it doesen't sound fixed, it doesen't sound an insult to the people who made this, it doesen't sound an insult to the other people who voted

It's not what you did, it's how you did it

Not that I disliked these days of madness, but that's just me being a shitposter

Then if you really wanted to ruin the fun and be the bad guys once again, buy military and start another war, just give to Alex 3-4 days to be ready with some new war mechanic to add at the last second and some server crash at the update, we like traditions

Dear Micchan,

As has already been observed, IQ AAs did not require our members to vote in a particular way - at least in BK, it was made very clear that people have the right to vote for whoever they choose and ultimately that's what they have done.  What you're arguing in favour of (apparently in the name of 'fairness') is for us to actually fix the vote by requiring our members to vote a certain way in certain proportions, which makes no sense if you want a fair and balanced poll.  There's nothing disrespectful about encouraging our members to vote and it's silly to suggest that we don't care about the awards when we're obviously making an effort to get our members to the polls - it's people such as yourself that appear to be getting salty (and advocating various measures to rig the vote in your favour) because the voting is 'wrong.'  

Secondly, participating in a democratic poll doesn't disrespect the efforts of the people who are running it - it reaffirms those efforts through our choice to take part in them.  The organizers should have no agenda beyond ensuring that the vote runs smoothly and that as many people get the opportunity to vote as possible - it's not (and it shouldn't be) their concern who wins or what the vote proportion is in individual races.  If they are concerned with these things, it's simply evidence of bias on their part, which really isn't something we should validate by apologizing for exercising our right to vote.  It seems like a lot of people want to have it both ways - you want the illusion of a competitive vote (so you can claim it's legitimate) but you also want to people you think 'should' win to do so.  Well, that's not how democracy works - people are (and should be) allowed to vote for whomever they choose and in whatever numbers they choose and no one (especially those that disagree with their vote) has any right to tell them that their choice matters less than yours does because you don't like how they've voted.

1ilmoq.jpg

21 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

As Curu pointed out in his long winded reply to me

i-dont-always-reply-but-when-i-do-its-lo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Curufinwe
Just now, Buorhann said:

>memegenerator.net

You have that bookmarked, don't you?

I find imgflip doesn't autoformat properly on the OWF, so it's my preferred source for all things meme-related.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sir Scarfalot said:

I've got an idea! If people don't like that their enemies got votes, why not...

go to war over it? :o

It's a perfectly good CB

I can support this.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Curufinwe said:

Dear Micchan,

As has already been observed, IQ AAs did not require our members to vote in a particular way - at least in BK, it was made very clear that people have the right to vote for whoever they choose and ultimately that's what they have done. 

You have no idea how many times I have read the same reply, still wrong, because when you say "hey if we all vote for X option we can easy win, you are not forced but many of os will do it" the 80% of the people will vote for that option, especially those that otherwise would not have voted, the people who actually care are more likely to vote what they want

11 minutes ago, Curufinwe said:

What you're arguing in favour of (apparently in the name of 'fairness') is for us to actually fix the vote by requiring our members to vote a certain way in certain proportions, which makes no sense if you want a fair and balanced poll.  There's nothing disrespectful about encouraging our members to vote and it's silly to suggest that we don't care about the awards when we're obviously making an effort to get our members to the polls - it's people such as yourself that appear to be getting salty (and advocating various measures to rig the vote in your favour) because the voting is 'wrong.'

I don't care if this is fixed, I don't want to know it that this is fixed, I like wrestling that is fake, but I hate when they do something too fake i-want-to-believe.jpg

If you mass vote a stupid option I know that you fixed this and I'm mad because people stop voting, people don't discuss the things voted, people don't care anymore, etc.

If 2 legit picks have a fair competition until the end I'm happy, if the last day one of the two wins the last sprint with 5-10 "fixed" votes who cares, a legit pick won, don't fix where you have no objective shot to win and give me a fair competition until the end

 

And about democracy I was teached by his legness Infinite Citadel that democracy is good in the real world and it doesn't work well on P&W, he always asked our opinion and always did what he wanted at the end, and sometimes we were wrong and he was right, and sometimes we were right and he was right, your vote means more than a ramdon BK who joined this month because you come here to talk with other people, you work hard for your alliance, you know things while he knows nothing

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

256603027fdc6e3fdaedf535ea4b0f644caf6ff7

38 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

I've got an idea! If people don't like that their enemies got votes, why not...

go to war over it? :o

It's a perfectly good CB

Yes pls

39 minutes ago, element85 said:

Yeah, vote my reply down all you want Micchan.. That doesn't change the truth that hurts. 

You are in the ayy lmao mode, I prefeer to reply to Curu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Micchan said:

You have no idea how many times I have read the same reply, still wrong, because when you say "hey if we all vote for X option we can easy win, you are not forced but many of os will do it" the 80% of the people will vote for that option, especially those that otherwise would not have voted, the people who actually care are more likely to vote what they want

They can suggest all they want but they still can't make us vote in a way we don't want to vote, for what ever reason. So once again, you are wrong.

 

5 minutes ago, Micchan said:

If you mass vote a stupid option I know that you fixed this and I'm mad because people stop voting, people don't discuss the things voted, people don't care anymore, etc.

Maybe people like the no avatar approach. Just because you like silly avatars doesn't mean everyone does.

 

6 minutes ago, Micchan said:

And about democracy I was teached by his legness Infinite Citadel that democracy is good in the real world and it doesn't work well on P&W, he always asked our opinion and always did what he wanted at the end, and sometimes we were wrong and he was right, and sometimes we were right and he was right, your vote means more than a ramdon BK who joined this month because you come here to talk with other people, you work hard for your alliance, you know things while he knows nothing

They suggested we vote a certain way, if we agreed we did, if we didn't, we didn't.

Also, everyone's vote counts the same. No ones vote is worth more than anyone elses vote.

3 minutes ago, Micchan said:

Yes pls

Your lazy asses will have to actually do something if you want a war so I am sure we are safe for another couple of years.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Curufinwe
55 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

I've got an idea! If people don't like that their enemies got votes, why not...

go to war over it? :o

It's a perfectly good CB

How every Awards ceremony should be settled?

 

 

Edited by Curufinwe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Curufinwe said:

don't try to force your preferences of what constitutes a 'right' or 'wrong' choice on others just because you don't agree with their reasoning.

 

Literally the purpose of this thread is to talk about the process. I gave my own opinion to contribute to the discussion. I never forced anyone to accept my votes or preferences. So kindly take your salt and go eat somewhere else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Curufinwe
1 minute ago, Mayor said:

Literally the purpose of this thread is to talk about the process. I gave my own opinion to contribute to the discussion. I never forced anyone to accept my votes or preferences. So kindly take your salt and go eat somewhere else.

And (in the bit you edited out) I'm telling you why a vetting process is open to abuse (which is why it's not generally used in democratic states).  It's not salty to point out the flaws in a proposed suggestion ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like if I say "Pizza is good" some random BK-NPO will reply with "but we just suggested, no one was forced"

 

@Who Me

A little example to make you understand why your reply makes no sense

Non american: Why you voted for a dumb president like Trump (or a dumb alternative like Hillary)?

American: Maybe people like the no brain approach. Just because you like competent politicians doesn't mean everyone does.

 

@element85

Yep, that ayy lmao mode

 

9 minutes ago, Sketchy said:

Most Active Alliance:  This can't be known by people outside an alliance generally.

Unless it means politically and militarily active and not about how much they log in or they talk in their channels, forums, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Micchan said:

I feel like if I say "Pizza is good" some random BK-NPO will reply with "but we just suggested, no one was forced"

 

@Who Me

A little example to make you understand why your reply makes no sense

Non american: Why you voted for a dumb president like Trump (or a dumb alternative like Hillary)?

American: Maybe people like the no brain approach. Just because you like competent politicians doesn't mean everyone does.

 

@element85

Yep, that ayy lmao mode

 

Unless it means politically and militarily active and not about how much they log in or they talk in their channels, forums, etc.

I see, so only what you think matters, other opinions don't matter if they don't line up with yours.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Curufinwe said:

And (in the bit you edited out) I'm telling you why a vetting process is open to abuse (which is why it's not generally used in democratic states).  It's not salty to point out the flaws in a proposed suggestion ;)

No, but it is salty when you whine for a week straight in multiple threads and are apparently against any sort of consensus.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jax locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.