These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New Dev Blog: Alliance Panel at Fanfest 2012: The Conclusion

First post First post
Author
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#961 - 2012-03-29 16:33:14 UTC
Kosh Seere wrote:
Jade Constantine wrote:

Yeah it was made partially in response to the developer corruption scandal that involved T20 and Band of Brothers alliance and make sure the players had oversight to ensure that could never happen again.

The irony is we almost had a situation where Mittani was boasting of being in control of developers and influence within CCP and replaying this corrupt old scenario again. Had Mittani not been appropriately punished over his behaviour at Fanfest many many players and many external media sites would have considered he was being given unfair treatment that other players could not expect.


I'm so happy you see the world with such nice conspiracy eyes. Ever played with the possibility that Mittens was trolling when he was saying he controlled the devs?

I think you should quit eve and go outside.


Somebody serving on a body that was setup to contront the stink of developer corruption in an online game should know better than to troll about corruption between him and his ex-goonswarm buddies in said online game development.

While I don't think you should quit the game I do think you should probably unplug your keyboard.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom

Daviclond
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#962 - 2012-03-29 16:34:02 UTC
CCP Navigator wrote:
The panelist was a member of the CSM who has subsequently resigned from CSM6 and, as a result, will resign his seat on CSM7.


You can tell it was PR/marketing management who made the call to give him the boot from the really weird, vague language used to describe his kicking.
Chokichi Ozuwara
Perkone
Caldari State
#963 - 2012-03-29 16:34:21 UTC
In a month no one will remember Mittani and Burn Jita will be a flop

This is a huge setback politically for the Goons, as they are one of the largest blocks and won't be represented

It is hilarious to see all of these Goonies on the forum crying like babies. Maybe they need to HTFU. The amount of whining and equivocation is thick enough to cut with a knife

Your leader is dumped. We don't care what you think. What are you going to do about it

I am guessing nothing because you guys are actually really soft when someone else bullies you.

Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round.

Kosh Seere
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#964 - 2012-03-29 16:36:16 UTC
Chris LaPlant wrote:
Ah Goon tears. They sustain me.

How can they sustain you when you've never seen any?

Skill yourself!

Gideon Tyler
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#965 - 2012-03-29 16:37:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Gideon Tyler
Daviclond wrote:
CCP Navigator wrote:
The panelist was a member of the CSM who has subsequently resigned from CSM6 and, as a result, will resign his seat on CSM7.


You can tell it was PR/marketing management who made the call to give him the boot from the really weird, vague language used to describe his kicking.


And rightly so, the Mittani has been a Marketing/PR disaster with this latest debacle. Frankly, I would not follow this guy to the grocery store for a loaf of bread if he is no smarter than this. Maybe you should not either.
Pyx Jasta
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#966 - 2012-03-29 16:38:44 UTC
Pyrus Octavius wrote:
[
You mean 10k character votes right? Because the way I understand this works, that each account has 3 character slots, so technically 1 person, can vote 3 times. So in reality, 10k individual people are not disenfranchised.


You understand wrong. You can only vote once per account. Of course many people have multiple accounts, so that 10k number is probably representative of fewer than 10k individual people.
Daviclond
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#967 - 2012-03-29 16:39:03 UTC
Chokichi Ozuwara wrote:
In a month no one will remember Mittani and Burn Jita will be a flop

This is a huge setback politically for the Goons, as they are one of the largest blocks and won't be represented

It is hilarious to see all of these Goonies on the forum crying like babies. Maybe they need to HTFU. The amount of whining and equivocation is thick enough to cut with a knife

Your leader is dumped. We don't care what you think. What are you going to do about it

I am guessing nothing because you guys are actually really soft when someone else bullies you.


just fyi, all true goons find this absolutely hilarious and aren't bothered

we've picked up a few j4g pubbies along the way and they're probably pretty unhappy, but for the rest of us this is some of the best posting since remedial absconded with the titan fund
Kosh Seere
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#968 - 2012-03-29 16:39:56 UTC
Mittens and Goons tried to make the new thing in eve "We love you". You know, spread the love and make eve a better place, but you butthurt pubbies had to turn it around to something awful like "Go kill yourself".

Skill yourself!

Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#969 - 2012-03-29 16:41:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Richard Desturned
Chokichi Ozuwara wrote:
Your leader is dumped. We don't care what you think. What are you going to do about it

Your freighter was ganked. We don't care what you think. What are you going to do about it?

just an example of how it'll be business as usual, the only difference is that they'll try to say "but your votes lol" while csm 7 basically ends up a dog and pony show

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration

CCP Xhagen
C C P
C C P Alliance
#970 - 2012-03-29 16:41:22 UTC
Hi folks. We've noticed a few common questions popping up in this thread that we'd like to answer.


Q1, CCP forced the resignation of the CSM Chairman.
A1, As a part of the CSM bylaws, banned players are ineligible to sit on the CSM. This would have been an unfortunate side effect of CCP feeling that a temporary ban was the correct course of action in this case.
However, prior to any notification to this effect, The chairman of CSM6 resigned of his own volition as he had previously announced that he would do. Since the chair resigned from CSM 6 prior to being banned and was not yet seated on CSM 7 he will be able to run for future CSMs.

We have had members resign from the CSM before. The process is pretty clear in these cases, the next person on the voting poll becomes active. This is the first time the chairman of the CSM has resigned so we are discussing with the CSM if we should make amendments to the process based on that.


Q2, There is an issue of 10,058 votes. What will CCP do about that?
A2, As in most democratic societies, if an elected member resigns the governance system is designed to handle that; for CSM6 the "next" person steps in (an alternate); for CSM7, where we had removed the concept of ‘alternate’ and increased the size of the CSM to 14, the council simply continues to function minus one. If players are not satisfied with that system they should contact the CSM and propose changes for CSM 7 to discuss formally. The CSM can bring this issue up directly with CCP and propose changes should such an event happen in the future.
It is clear from many communications from CSM6 and CSM7-elect members that they take the representation of these 10,058 voters very seriously and hopefully the remaining CSM representatives will act in the spirit of those who voted for the resigned member.

We should also keep in mind that every CSM member has the obligation to, at some level, represent all of EVE and its players, and that the voting system is anonymous.


Q3, Real life actions should not equate to in game sanctions. Why did this happen?
A3, After much deliberation on the subject, CCP considers the Alliance Panel to be an official CCP forum, as it is hosted by CCP and broadcast in a similarly visible fashion to the EVE Online forums. As such, it falls under the jurisdiction of the TOS. Furthermore, the panelist, present on the panel in order to represent his in-game identity, advocated using in-game actions to achieve a real world outcome. Specifically he suggested that if anyone wanted to make another player kill themselves in real life, they should go in game and harass them to achieve that consequence. The totality of the situation including the official forum in which it was held and statements of the panelist during the Q&A, have since lead to in-game sanctions. However, it is important to note that this incidence does not necessarily create precedence for any other "real life" actions or statements triggering a ban.


Q4, Wait, so you DID vet the presentations? Meaning it was perfectly fine for him to make fun of a suicidal player?
A4, Although the contents of the Alliance Panel presentations and discussion topics are reviewed by CCP prior to the event itself, the TOS-breaking incident took place during an unscripted Q&A session after the main presentation which was not mentioned in the submitted presentation. The submitted presentation slides (although distasteful) did not give the name of the player at any time, nor did they call for direct action against that player, and therefore passed muster. CCP have always allowed substantial leeway during the Alliance Panel and we look forward to ensuring that future events remain entertaining and engaging for the EVE community.

CCP Xhagen | Associate Producer | @strangelocation

Kile Kitmoore
#971 - 2012-03-29 16:42:28 UTC
Anyone have any words from the victim? You know the guy on the verge of suicide who contacts the leader of an alliance who's source of entertainment is to ruin YOUR game. The fact he is contacting Mittani with such personal information in the first place is odd, odd enough that I would have taken it as some dude trolling.

If the guy wasn't being harassed before he certainly is now with CCP's decision.
Daviclond
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#972 - 2012-03-29 16:44:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Daviclond
free Alexander "The Mittani" Gualdiuaghauigh
Praerian
Perkone
Caldari State
#973 - 2012-03-29 16:46:56 UTC
it was like a disturbance in the force and 10,000 goons cried out in pain.
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#974 - 2012-03-29 16:47:29 UTC
Xhagen, were you not there moderating the panel?

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration

Daviclond
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#975 - 2012-03-29 16:50:03 UTC
CCP Xhagen wrote:

It is clear from many communications from CSM6 and CSM7-elect members that they take the representation of these 10,058 voters very seriously and hopefully the remaining CSM representatives will act in the spirit of those who voted for the resigned member.


Well thank God we have Darius III on the council.
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#976 - 2012-03-29 16:52:14 UTC
CCP Xhagen wrote:
Since the chair resigned from CSM 6 prior to being banned and was not yet seated on CSM 7 he will be able to run for future CSMs.


That is a very poor decision that CCP in general should probably reconsider over the year to come. An individual's noteriety/prominence should never overcome the basic requirement to be a player of good standing and reputation (ie without serious infractions on the account.)

The way you've stated it there just sounds like a shady legal loophole and it will be seen as such.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom

Snot Shot
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#977 - 2012-03-29 16:54:20 UTC
CCP Xhagen wrote:
Hi folks. We've noticed a few common questions popping up in this thread that we'd like to answer.


Q1, CCP forced the resignation of the CSM Chairman.
A1, As a part of the CSM bylaws, banned players are ineligible to sit on the CSM. This would have been an unfortunate side effect of CCP feeling that a temporary ban was the correct course of action in this case.
However, prior to any notification to this effect, The chairman of CSM6 resigned of his own volition as he had previously announced that he would do. Since the chair resigned from CSM 6 prior to being banned and was not yet seated on CSM 7 he will be able to run for future CSMs.

We have had members resign from the CSM before. The process is pretty clear in these cases, the next person on the voting poll becomes active. This is the first time the chairman of the CSM has resigned so we are discussing with the CSM if we should make amendments to the process based on that.


Q2, There is an issue of 10,058 votes. What will CCP do about that?
A2, As in most democratic societies, if an elected member resigns the governance system is designed to handle that; for CSM6 the "next" person steps in (an alternate); for CSM7, where we had removed the concept of ‘alternate’ and increased the size of the CSM to 14, the council simply continues to function minus one. If players are not satisfied with that system they should contact the CSM and propose changes for CSM 7 to discuss formally. The CSM can bring this issue up directly with CCP and propose changes should such an event happen in the future.
It is clear from many communications from CSM6 and CSM7-elect members that they take the representation of these 10,058 voters very seriously and hopefully the remaining CSM representatives will act in the spirit of those who voted for the resigned member.

We should also keep in mind that every CSM member has the obligation to, at some level, represent all of EVE and its players, and that the voting system is anonymous.


Q3, Real life actions should not equate to in game sanctions. Why did this happen?
A3, After much deliberation on the subject, CCP considers the Alliance Panel to be an official CCP forum, as it is hosted by CCP and broadcast in a similarly visible fashion to the EVE Online forums. As such, it falls under the jurisdiction of the TOS. Furthermore, the panelist, present on the panel in order to represent his in-game identity, advocated using in-game actions to achieve a real world outcome. Specifically he suggested that if anyone wanted to make another player kill themselves in real life, they should go in game and harass them to achieve that consequence. The totality of the situation including the official forum in which it was held and statements of the panelist during the Q&A, have since lead to in-game sanctions. However, it is important to note that this incidence does not necessarily create precedence for any other "real life" actions or statements triggering a ban.


Q4, Wait, so you DID vet the presentations? Meaning it was perfectly fine for him to make fun of a suicidal player?
A4, Although the contents of the Alliance Panel presentations and discussion topics are reviewed by CCP prior to the event itself, the TOS-breaking incident took place during an unscripted Q&A session after the main presentation which was not mentioned in the submitted presentation. The submitted presentation slides (although distasteful) did not give the name of the player at any time, nor did they call for direct action against that player, and therefore passed muster. CCP have always allowed substantial leeway during the Alliance Panel and we look forward to ensuring that future events remain entertaining and engaging for the EVE community.

Like a BOSS!!....Cool

Twitter = @Snot_Shot  - “If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything"

evesnotshot.blogspot.com

Ispia Jaydrath
Reib Autonomous Industries
#978 - 2012-03-29 16:55:02 UTC
CCP Xhagen wrote:
Hi folks. We've noticed a few common questions popping up in this thread that we'd like to answer.


Q1, CCP forced the resignation of the CSM Chairman.
A1, As a part of the CSM bylaws, banned players are ineligible to sit on the CSM. This would have been an unfortunate side effect of CCP feeling that a temporary ban was the correct course of action in this case.
However, prior to any notification to this effect, The chairman of CSM6 resigned of his own volition as he had previously announced that he would do. Since the chair resigned from CSM 6 prior to being banned and was not yet seated on CSM 7 he will be able to run for future CSMs.

We have had members resign from the CSM before. The process is pretty clear in these cases, the next person on the voting poll becomes active. This is the first time the chairman of the CSM has resigned so we are discussing with the CSM if we should make amendments to the process based on that.


I can tell you're in marketing because of the way you're weaseling around to make it look like mittens resigned from CSM 7 instead of you removing him.
Gizmo Marpa
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#979 - 2012-03-29 16:55:59 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
Xhagen, were you not there moderating the panel?

No, CCP was just there implicitly urging everyone to get hammered because Fanfest is (rightfully) a "party" atmosphere.

Then some crybabies cried crocodile tears simply because someone they don't like said something that they considered a HUGE OUTRAGE
Sverige Pahis
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#980 - 2012-03-29 16:56:03 UTC
Jade Constantine wrote:
CCP Xhagen wrote:
Since the chair resigned from CSM 6 prior to being banned and was not yet seated on CSM 7 he will be able to run for future CSMs.


That is a very poor decision that CCP in general should probably reconsider over the year to come. An individual's noteriety/prominence should never overcome the basic requirement to be a player of good standing and reputation (ie without serious infractions on the account.)

The way you've stated it there just sounds like a shady legal loophole and it will be seen as such.



Bottom of the pile roleplayer tries to manipulate a barely controversial dramabomb to suit his horrible larping political agenda, news at 11