[VOTE] Should voting for Councilors require you to purchase the game?

[Lecic]

Link to the original suggestion thread- Suggestion - Require Purchasing The Game To Vote

DukeofRealms suggested I make a poll on the matter to gain further community input.

There's also a third, points-based system suggested by Duke a few posts into the original thread that could work.

 

[DukeofRealms]

I'd like to make it known that there are ways to decrease the chance of this happening, without restricting the vote to purchased users.

• Blocking TOR users from voting (TOR provides a list that can be used to do this)
• Blocking known proxy servers, there are comprehensive blacklists of proxy IPs available to block an account
• Blocking throwaway emails
• Requiring minimum register time
• Requiring minimum post count
• Requiring minimum forum registration

We could also do it by having a point threshold, a user would have to meet X number of points to be able to vote. I'll give an example.

Number of points to vote: 10

30 points: Purchase Game
3 points: Registration date longer than X amount of days
Base point of 6 points: Meet minimum post count to get 6 points and 1 more point is awarded every time they meet X more number of posts
1 point: Uploaded avatar
1 point: Signature set
-10 points: TOR/Proxy IP
-10 points: Throwaway email
-10 points: Forum ban

Add other positive and negative factors to decide whether the person is elligible for vote, the more comprehensive the system is, the better.

 

[SkylordLuke]

To do my part,as I also believe this is the right choice..

As you (anyone reading this here) may be aware.. the next council elections are getting near.
So it has become even more important that we solve this important question before the next applications arrive.
To avoid cheating during voting process,where users would create a number of alternate accounts,and using proxy accounts to provide votes to themselves or to their favourites.

Devs and moderators can try to do a lot on "our" side to prevent cheating,but even so.. it cant be always avoided..unless..

to prevent these problems
In order to participate in voting where we will choose someone to represent the community,
players/forum members must have purchased the game before the official voting starts.

which would mean they now support the game,and that they are serious about participating in something that can contribute..not only to the forums and the community as a whole,but to the game itself.



:/ you could have at least made some kind of effort to present this better,I bet most will skip this thread with only a glance sadly

 

[CyberTao]

-10 points: Forum ban

Minus points for forum bans? I didn't know number of bans was tracked.

 

[Ithirahad]

I don't support things like blocking TOR, plus being able to vote for council members would make for a good buyer's privilege. If you bought the game, that means that you care at least somewhat about it.

 

[DukeofRealms]

before the official voting starts.

I disagree, purchasing is a verification method. Whether someone purchases before or after voting starts is irrelevant.

Minus points for forum bans? I didn't know number of bans was tracked.

We can check if a user is banned. Number of bans doesn't make too much sense, as generally you only get banned once (and if you're really unlucky, twice).

I don't support things like blocking TOR

With the points system, it would not "block TOR". It would simply put that as a factor into deciding whether a user is an alt.

 

[Ithirahad]

erm, should I say, "disadvantaging TOR users?"

 

[FlyingDebris]

To be honest, even then the relative interest a player has in the success of the game is greatly increased when they put forth money towards it. If a player has bought the game, they're more likely to think over who they want in the council instead of just picking the first person on the list.

 

[Imagination01]

So basically anyone who cares about their privacy and try to keep themselves safe in the online world more often than not, unable to have a say in who represents the community?

And pay to vote? Wow, so you're asking for more than half of the votes (if not more) to not be counted just because they have not spent money on a early access game?

If you're worried about people making alt accounts to vote for Player A, look at user generated reports, login times, registration dates, what they say, what they do, etc etc, look for any similarities and mark users as suspicious then put additional investigation in place if there are any.

Dont just blanket ban anyone who users an anonymizer because 5 or 6% use these services for bad stuff.

 

[SkylordLuke]

And pay to vote? Wow, so you're asking for more than half of the votes (if not more) to not be counted just because they have not spent money on a early access game?

hmm,I am never gonna buy that game,..oh look!! some kind of elections,oh just do this and that and add this in the game,i dont care,its not like I... bought the game lol

 

[Imagination01]

hmm,I am never gonna buy that game,..oh look!! some kind of elections,oh just do this and that and add this in the game,i dont care,its not like I... bought the game lol

Just because someone has not put money into an early access game that may not even get out of early access does not mean they do not care about the game's future.

 

[Lecic]

And pay to vote? Wow, so you're asking for more than half of the votes (if not more) to not be counted just because they have not spent money on a early access game?

You pay to show how you are invested in the future of the game. You need to prove you are invested in the future of the game to vote for the people who have, while very slight, an effect on the future of the game.

 

[Ithirahad]

So basically anyone who cares about their privacy and try to keep themselves safe in the online world more often than not, unable to have a say in who represents the community?
(...)
Dont just blanket ban anyone who users an anonymizer because 5 or 6% use these services for bad stuff.

Overstatement; Duke clarified this already when I made a similar overstatement. What's the standard forum response to comments like this... ah, right... I think it goes something like, uhm... "lrn2read."

And pay to vote? Wow, so you're asking for more than half of the votes (if not more) to not be counted just because they have not spent money on a early access game?

With the current way the games market works, just being able to play the early access at all - let alone for free - is a privilege in itself. Also remember that the Council's job, regardless of who's elected, is largely to distill feedback from all players, not just paying ones.

If you're worried about people making alt accounts to vote for Player A, look at user generated reports, login times, registration dates, what they say, what they do, etc etc, look for any similarities and mark users as suspicious then put additional investigation in place if there are any.

...Or, don't go through all of that trouble just to pick up after a bunch of assheads, and have the vote be for paying players.

 

[FlyingDebris]

So basically anyone who cares about their privacy and try to keep themselves safe in the online world more often than not, unable to have a say in who represents the community?

And pay to vote? Wow, so you're asking for more than half of the votes (if not more) to not be counted just because they have not spent money on a early access game?

If you're worried about people making alt accounts to vote for Player A, look at user generated reports, login times, registration dates, what they say, what they do, etc etc, look for any similarities and mark users as suspicious then put additional investigation in place if there are any.

Dont just blanket ban anyone who users an anonymizer because 5 or 6% use these services for bad stuff.

For some reason, I am not surprised in the slightest that this is coming from you.

 

[Lecic]

Oh, and Imagination01, given that you haven't purchased the game... your response isn't very surprising.

 

[jorgekorke]

While Duke's system seems nice and well-thought, I think it would be more practical to just let the ones who purchased the game to vote. Way easier to implement.

After all, there are no plans given by the devs to add any kind of advantage that the people who purchased the game would have over the ones who do it for free. This could be one, as it does not impact directly on any way the gameplay at the servers. Would give one more purpose than just having a little nice badge.

 

[Aynslei]

Lecic may I suggest you make a post in general forum linking to this? I would do it my self but I feel it would not be my place.

It is a little out of the way finding it from both here and the original topic. I would very much be interested to see if any one speaking against this idea has well thought out arguments against such a system.

That said even a one time run of such an election is possible, with the best damage control for Schine being an honest. "We gave it a shot, and council terms are short/insignificant enough to not cause any lasting harm in regards to representing the community."

 

[Lecic]

Lecic may I suggest you make a post in general forum linking to this? I would do it my self but I feel it would not be my place.

It is a little out of the way finding it from both here and the original topic. I would very much be interested to see if any one speaking against this idea has well thought out arguments against such a system.

That said even a one time run of such an election is possible, with the best damage control for Schine being an honest. "We gave it a shot, and council terms are short/insignificant enough to not cause any lasting harm in regards to representing the community."

I think it might be overstepping my bounds a bit to put this there as well.

 

[Master_Artificer]

I don't like the idea of a "Paywall" behind the ability to vote in people who have the unpaid job of aggregating ideas off the suggestion forums.

I do think you need to own a paid copy of the game to submit a council app. That makes more sense to me.


Besides, these kinda remind me of "Voter ID" laws that will be primarily aimed at disadvantaging odium users, as well as other new players.
A common argument is 'Should someone who sees a youtube video of a player asking them to download this game and vote for them have the same weight as someone who actively participates in the game process and has done so for years?'
You have to remember that this is just for short term positions for members who get a shiny tag and discuss the game among 6 others as they literally read the forums day after day, its not half a year or longer positions that have a hand in making new features.

 

[Lecic]

I'm not sure you can consider "taking away a potential unfair advantage" as "disadvantaging."