Last year, when I wasn't running for CSM, talking about the CSM candidates was pretty easy. It was doubly easy because among the "serious" candidates that I felt had a shot, about half of them were CSM6 members running for reelection and the other half were new voices that I thought stood a good chance. So last year, I wrote three posts on the matter:
- a post with CSM6 members that I endorsed for reelection;
- a post with new voices that I endorsed; and,
- a post where I listed who I thought would win that didn't necessarily correspond with the first two posts.
This year, things are quite different. Only two CSM7 members are running for reelection -- Trebor Daehdoow and Greene Lee -- and talking about them will be very easy. I don't think Greene Lee should be reelected based on his CSM7 performance, he's unlikely to be reelected because his power base is gone, and he didn't do enough outreach with the players during the year he had to give himself much of a shot. Trebor's the exact opposite, as I've already covered.
I still want to write a post about who I think will win, and I still want to endorse a slate of candidates. But this year, there's a little logical split happening in my head. After much agonizing, I've come to the conclusion that it's in both my best interests and the CSM's best interests if I endorse a full slate of 13 candidates, plus myself. And that's what you'll be getting from me on Monday or so: a "voting guide" that includes the names of 14 CSM candidates that I hope you will vote for. But, in between who I'm going to endorse and who I think is going to win is another group of 14 CSM candidates that I want to win and that I think deserve to be there. Let's lay it out visually:
At the top, CSM candidates that I think will win. At the bottom, CSM candidates that I'm going to endorse. Some of the people I'm going to endorse, I unfortunately don't think are going to win. But I'm going to endorse them because I believe they have an important perspective on the game. Ali Aras is an excellent example. Unfortunately, I don't think she has much of a chance of winning, but she's got a terrific perspective on EVE's new player experience and the experiences of new players in general. So I want her to win and will endorse her for that reason.
At the opposite end of the scale is someone like Banlish, TEST Alliance's candidate. He's almost certain to win no matter what I say or think. Sure, he's got great in-game experience and if we both win I look forward to working with him. But he's not campaigning or doing player outreach; he's just coasting. Fine, he has that right. But it doesn't mean I have to endorse him. ;-) Other candidates are equally easy. I'll endorse Trebor, I hope he wins, and I think he will. Easy. I don't think Fon Revenhort is going to win, I hope he doesn't, and there's no way in hell I'm endorsing him. Also easy.
The complicated group is that little pink sliver in between. mynnna is assured a CSM8 seat if anyone is, and despite some holes in his EVE knowledge, I hope he wins. He'll bring a very valuable voice to the group, he's got some fantastic experience, and in a term that's likely to be dominated by economic concerns in New Eden, CSM8 will be lucky to have him. But should I endorse him? You have to be kidding. He doesn't need my help.
Therefore, there are 14 candidates that I want to win. There are 14 candidates that I intend to endorse. But these two groups are not the same. mynnna's presence in that little pink sliver logically means that there is at least one candidate that I'm going to endorse that I don't want to win. This is called "politics", and it automatically gives anyone whose brain does not operate in channels this complicated permission to laugh at my discomfort. ;-)
There are two solutions to the dilemma, but politically, both are poor choices:
- I could just endorse mynnna. But this is foolish because the top two vote-getters in a separate STV election get two "permanent" seats in Iceland. mynnna has a good shot at one of them, and politically it would be very foolish of me to endorse him for this reason. This is also why you probably won't be seeing Trebor's name on the CFC ballot, even though The Mittani likes Trebor personally and probably secretly thinks Trebor should be re-elected.
- Or I could endorse 12 candidates instead of 13. But this is foolish because given the way STV operates, it's a smart move for me to endorse a full slate. If I don't endorse a full slate, there's a small chance that my votes and the votes of others that are nice enough to vote for the slate I endorse will be wasted. That would obviously be bad. The more votes go to actual winning candidates, the stronger the position CSM8 will be in.
So expect three posts from me on this matter:
- a post about who I endorse, and why;
- a post about other candidates that I don't endorse and how I think they'd do on the CSM; and,
- a post about who I think is going to win.