These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Anonymity For CSM: Common Sense And Safety.

First post First post First post
Author
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#141 - 2013-02-05 22:57:52 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Scooter McCabe wrote:
My real life qualifications matter how exactly? If anything people can use their real life "experience" to pettifog the fact they don't know what they are talking about game wise.

If it is truly your position that a candidates RL experience and qualifications are irrelevant to the question of whether or not they will be an effective CSM, then I fear you will have great difficulty convincing CCP Xhagen of the merits of your case.
How many current CSM actually included their real-life qualifications when running? I'm pretty sure nobody knows what Noah does for a job. I'm pretty sure writing a video game 30 years ago, back when all the man-power required was one or two people, is not a qualification. And what does Xhagen care what a CSMer does in real-life? He has no control over who is voted in or not.


To be fair, while I didn't mention it as much *this time*, I did bring it up when I was running for CSM6.

Having RL experience in programming/design can be very helpful for a CSM rep. It helps you to understand the scope of some changes, and to see why doing something like "fix corp roles" is actually a pretty damn hard problem. It certainly isn't required, though having at least one or two programmers on the CSM helps things, especially when we are talking about the API/CREST.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog

Scooter McCabe
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#142 - 2013-02-05 23:48:45 UTC
Two step wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Scooter McCabe wrote:
My real life qualifications matter how exactly? If anything people can use their real life "experience" to pettifog the fact they don't know what they are talking about game wise.

If it is truly your position that a candidates RL experience and qualifications are irrelevant to the question of whether or not they will be an effective CSM, then I fear you will have great difficulty convincing CCP Xhagen of the merits of your case.
How many current CSM actually included their real-life qualifications when running? I'm pretty sure nobody knows what Noah does for a job. I'm pretty sure writing a video game 30 years ago, back when all the man-power required was one or two people, is not a qualification. And what does Xhagen care what a CSMer does in real-life? He has no control over who is voted in or not.


To be fair, while I didn't mention it as much *this time*, I did bring it up when I was running for CSM6.

Having RL experience in programming/design can be very helpful for a CSM rep. It helps you to understand the scope of some changes, and to see why doing something like "fix corp roles" is actually a pretty damn hard problem. It certainly isn't required, though having at least one or two programmers on the CSM helps things, especially when we are talking about the API/CREST.


If I have been informed correctly you wrote code for a text based MUD, EVE Online is certainly more complicated than a text based game. I mean you as a programmer and CCPs programmers are night and day. It would be like taking a kid who plays paintball and having him tell "war stories" to an actual soldier fresh from 3 tours in Iraq or Afghanistan. Its just not the same and down right misleading.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#143 - 2013-02-06 02:02:11 UTC
Scooter McCabe wrote:
If I have been informed correctly


You haven't.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#144 - 2013-02-06 02:13:55 UTC
Scooter McCabe wrote:
Two step wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Scooter McCabe wrote:
My real life qualifications matter how exactly? If anything people can use their real life "experience" to pettifog the fact they don't know what they are talking about game wise.

If it is truly your position that a candidates RL experience and qualifications are irrelevant to the question of whether or not they will be an effective CSM, then I fear you will have great difficulty convincing CCP Xhagen of the merits of your case.
How many current CSM actually included their real-life qualifications when running? I'm pretty sure nobody knows what Noah does for a job. I'm pretty sure writing a video game 30 years ago, back when all the man-power required was one or two people, is not a qualification. And what does Xhagen care what a CSMer does in real-life? He has no control over who is voted in or not.


To be fair, while I didn't mention it as much *this time*, I did bring it up when I was running for CSM6.

Having RL experience in programming/design can be very helpful for a CSM rep. It helps you to understand the scope of some changes, and to see why doing something like "fix corp roles" is actually a pretty damn hard problem. It certainly isn't required, though having at least one or two programmers on the CSM helps things, especially when we are talking about the API/CREST.


If I have been informed correctly you wrote code for a text based MUD, EVE Online is certainly more complicated than a text based game. I mean you as a programmer and CCPs programmers are night and day. It would be like taking a kid who plays paintball and having him tell "war stories" to an actual soldier fresh from 3 tours in Iraq or Afghanistan. Its just not the same and down right misleading.


+1 to scooter, -1 to hans.

Spreadsheet based is way superior then text, and everyone knows it. Please leave hans.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne

rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#145 - 2013-02-06 02:17:02 UTC
Two step wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Scooter McCabe wrote:
My real life qualifications matter how exactly? If anything people can use their real life "experience" to pettifog the fact they don't know what they are talking about game wise.

If it is truly your position that a candidates RL experience and qualifications are irrelevant to the question of whether or not they will be an effective CSM, then I fear you will have great difficulty convincing CCP Xhagen of the merits of your case.
How many current CSM actually included their real-life qualifications when running? I'm pretty sure nobody knows what Noah does for a job. I'm pretty sure writing a video game 30 years ago, back when all the man-power required was one or two people, is not a qualification. And what does Xhagen care what a CSMer does in real-life? He has no control over who is voted in or not.


To be fair, while I didn't mention it as much *this time*, I did bring it up when I was running for CSM6.

Having RL experience in programming/design can be very helpful for a CSM rep. It helps you to understand the scope of some changes, and to see why doing something like "fix corp roles" is actually a pretty damn hard problem. It certainly isn't required, though having at least one or two programmers on the CSM helps things, especially when we are talking about the API/CREST.


I think I take it as need a job that shows responsibility or helps you to view larger concepts as well.

Makes me wonder what Darius's old job was, with how he feels responsible protecting us from CCP. The old lady who stared out the window with binoculars is my guess.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne

rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#146 - 2013-02-06 02:19:36 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
rodyas wrote:
CCP should also develop some kind of pipe like network that connects all their computers, and allow data and other game type tech things to be sent to other computers, even though they are different rooms. Also they should upgrade to walkie talkies, that way they can still communicate even though, not in same room as well. Plus add finger print identification to their trash cans, so bums can't throw their trash away there so easily.

I read a tech magazine cover once, and used a TI-85 calculator in algrebra, eve-mail me for more tips.
Part of me is really hoping that you're running for CSM8.


Thanks for the compliment. But sadly wouldn't have the time to run, plus too new to the game still. Only be fun listening to me stammer past stuff really.

Can't get cocked teased or tricked either, since most CSM have done more then me, and they already complain about the workload.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne

Scooter McCabe
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#147 - 2013-02-07 08:03:00 UTC
I'm not letting this go off the front page till CCP changes its policy. If this was such a cut and dry issue it wouldn't have required most of CSM and CCP Xhagen coming in here to defend an unethical and unpractical policy.
Grath Telkin
SniggWaffe
WAFFLES.
#148 - 2013-02-07 10:21:08 UTC
Scooter McCabe wrote:
I'm not letting this go off the front page till CCP changes its policy. If this was such a cut and dry issue it wouldn't have required most of CSM and CCP Xhagen coming in here to defend an unethical and unpractical policy.

The worst part is not really giving a normal reason why.

Just kind of going "well its this way and we're not changing it".


What does somebodies real name have to do with what they do in game, isn't my alts name enough? What extra added purpose does somebodies real life name provide other than real life harassment?

Its actually already happened to a CSM so the precedent has been set, and yet no actual reason is provided by the dev other than "because". Well thanks for treating us like 5 year olds and telling us to go to our room 'because' but for the adults in the room could you throw out a normalized "why" that makes some kind of sense?

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Regat Kozovv
Alcothology
#149 - 2013-02-07 11:48:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Regat Kozovv
The only accountability needed at hand is to match the actions of a character in game with the policies and influence they are advocating. No disclosure of personal information is required to do this; only the test of ensuring that they "are who they say they are".

CCP Xhagen I suspect is falling victim to this logical fallacy. Since our scope of accountability only extends to actions taken in-game, then there's no reason why we would need any more information other than a verification that CSM member "X" is in fact character "Y" (not withstanding any character transfers/purchases).

Disclosing a real name not only reveals more private information than necessary, but in no way assists our ability to prove this test, as we, the players, lack any method to verify this ourselves. How do we prove that the individual disclosed owns the accounts in question? We cannot, only CCP can do this, as only they have the records to match names with billing.

So we are given half of the pieces required in order to perform our own "independent verification", if that was intended. It's an illusion of transparency, and nothing more.

It's a pretty strong principle to stand on for what amounts to little more than an advisory body. For all that's trumped about player "democracy", I'm reminded that the CSM, try as they may, have no powers to enforce decisions or requests made. They are representatives brought up to Iceland to carry arguments that CCP does not have the time or inclination to wade through the forums to find. In this last point, I do not fault them, but we need to recognize the limitations for what they are.

If, somehow, CSM members could demand design changes to the game, then I could certainly see where having a real name would facilitate me being able to check up on their history, since we're now discussing modifications to a selling product. The CSM might as well become a board of directors then, true stock holders of a sort, and the lines between in-game and out-of-game having virtually no separation.

But that hasn't happened, and never will happen. And so long as CCP remains a business, the CSM will always be little more than an in-person forum meet.

To demand true identities to be revealed and scrutinized when they provide no useful benefit not only makes unreasonable demands on privacy, but inflates this board for the theater it is.

Edit: I posted this after seeing CCP Xhagen's explanation of liability. I'm no lawyer, but issues such as those I would think take complete precedence over anything else. If CCP needs player names in order to protect themselves from liability, then it's an unfortunate circumstance, but a necessary one given the conditions the company needs to operate under.
Midori Amiiko
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#150 - 2013-02-07 22:16:22 UTC
I've noticed that I know the people I play with way better than the people that I know on Facebook. Being anonymous gives them the freedom to say what they really think. Contrast with Facebook, where it's all people talking out the side of their neck.

So somehow, tying a real ID to a virtual persona inhibits that personas willingness to speak freely. I, for one, like to be able to say what I really feel and value Eve as a place where I can do that. I'd hope that the members of the CSM feel free to speak their mind.

This is a complicated issue with far-reaching ramifications...for example, a search of the name Alexander Gianturco leads to many items on cyberbullying. How would that incident have unfolded if we only knew him as The Mittani? Is it a good thing that he's forever tied to his misspoken words at fanfest? You be the judge.
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#151 - 2013-02-07 23:48:27 UTC
^ An incident that large, it would only be a matter of time, before The Mittani's name was found and released.

You would still end up with a situation with his name connected to cyber bullying. Whether he was allowed to stay anonymous in the CSM or not.

If anything anonymity would only help with smaller things. But if you did something large, your name could come out anyways.

A lot of players liked the Mittani as CSM chairman since he was large or would do big things. Which means, if they want that again this anonymous issue shouldn't matter too much, since most likely their name would come out anyhow.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne

Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#152 - 2013-02-07 23:55:41 UTC
Scooter McCabe wrote:
Two step wrote:
To be fair, while I didn't mention it as much *this time*, I did bring it up when I was running for CSM6.

Having RL experience in programming/design can be very helpful for a CSM rep. It helps you to understand the scope of some changes, and to see why doing something like "fix corp roles" is actually a pretty damn hard problem. It certainly isn't required, though having at least one or two programmers on the CSM helps things, especially when we are talking about the API/CREST.


If I have been informed correctly you wrote code for a text based MUD, EVE Online is certainly more complicated than a text based game. I mean you as a programmer and CCPs programmers are night and day. It would be like taking a kid who plays paintball and having him tell "war stories" to an actual soldier fresh from 3 tours in Iraq or Afghanistan. Its just not the same and down right misleading.


Uh, no, that is not what I did (or what I do). I have worked in the game industry, but that was 14 years ago. I currently write client/server software for a company that sells a development environment to mostly large banks and telecoms (I'm sure you can figure out the company with a tiny bit of googling). I am not saying my current field has much to do with EVE, but I am saying that having real, working programmers is helpful.

The point isn't that I can suggest specific implementation methods or something insane like that, but that I have an appreciation for how difficult technically something is. Your theory about how different CCP's programmers are from me is pretty wildly off the mark. Game programming certainly isn't like it used to be when Trebor did it, and it has changed a lot since I was in the industry, but programming is still programming (except for very specialized fields like 3D graphics).

For example, look at this job posting from CCP's site: http://www.ccpgames.com/en/jobs/job-details.aspx?jobid=418 Note that no game programming experience is required (in fact, I am way overqualified for that specific job, since half of my programming is Flash UIs)

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog

Scooter McCabe
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#153 - 2013-02-12 00:52:20 UTC
14 years is a long time in the world computer game development. Do you think it was more relevant that you had been playing EVE for awhile and speaking from your knowledge on that, or pulling from memory something you knew about gaming from 14 years ago?
Shadoo
North Eastern Swat
#154 - 2013-02-12 01:24:16 UTC
I am really struggling to understand how your RL identity/work experience has anything to do with how suitable you are to represent your contingency in a sandbox video game MMO.

I'd rather have someone who knows about THE GAME represent me, than someone who has some sort of tech job, or is even a developer/producer of another video game. I don't really care how much you understand about development methodologies, network stack, client/server applications, python or whatever.

I couldn't give a flying...bird about how you think their internal development methodology should be run, how their network code could be made more efficient or how they can improve the client performance. If I thought your CV was impressive enough for CCP to listen to you on these, I'd question why you aren't applying to work for them.

I only care how much you know about THE GAME you are elected to represent the player base of. I care what you do in THE GAME and what your platform is that you want to advocate, listen and relay opinions on from the community that elects you to the developers.

I'm frankly a little concerned I see existing/wanting CSM members fail to acknowledge that there are probably very good candidates, perhaps better than they are, who are filtered out by this pointless, useless part of the process. And it makes me wonder if you are really concerned about "accountability" to the community more than you are about your chances to be (re)elected to represent the community you say you care about.

And no, there is no PL member I am aware of who would run if the RL disclosure wasn't in place. But there is at least one "space enemy" of ours who I'd trust to be my ambassador to 0.0 nullsec warfare who would run if the RL disclosure wasn't in place. And there have been countless others in the past, both friend and foe. Does this not concern you also?
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Top Belt for Fun
#155 - 2013-02-12 01:37:47 UTC
Two step wrote:

The point isn't that I can suggest specific implementation methods or something insane like that, but that I have an appreciation for how difficult technically something is. Your theory about how different CCP's programmers are from me is pretty wildly off the mark. Game programming certainly isn't like it used to be when Trebor did it, and it has changed a lot since I was in the industry, but programming is still programming (except for very specialized fields like 3D graphics).


I think it depends what part of the gaming industry you're working in. I've found the gaming industry has different concerns than other industries do. At any rate: I fully endorse anonymity for CSM candidates, and no I can't run because it'd be a conflict of interest. :)

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Cass Lie
State War Academy
Caldari State
#156 - 2013-02-12 07:15:56 UTC
Shadoo wrote:

And no, there is no PL member I am aware of who would run if the RL disclosure wasn't in place. But there is at least one "space enemy" of ours who I'd trust to be my ambassador to 0.0 nullsec warfare who would run if the RL disclosure wasn't in place. And there have been countless others in the past, both friend and foe. Does this not concern you also?


You may want to ask Grath about it. But yes, that is besides the point.

As I see it, the (only) strong point in favor of revealing RL identities is the difficulty and implied legal obligation to keeping them subsequently secret. The strong points against are the (imho somewhat stretched) fear of RL harassment and (somewhat more valid) the professional consequences of associating oneself with a die-hard politics in a game. Let's say both arguments are valid.

Nowadays, most (of the very substantial) work of the CSM is actually done in between summits and the actual flight to Iceland is just a cherry on top - both summits this year weren't actually too productive when it comes to CSM scrutinizing the content for the next expansion (to put it mildly). This may change with the new way CCP does things, but still, wouldn't it be nicer that the candidates could actually choose to remain anonymous? And further possibly only those who chose not to would fly to summits, give public speeches on EVE meets etc. With todays tech everyone can fully participate in a summit from a remote location (ask Alek/Kelduun) so they wouldn't miss out too much.

Also, with CCP actually having a plan for the following expansions for the first time ever and more and more CCP/CSM interaction happening via video conferences, wouldn't it be a good idea to cut the number of summits to just once a year? Most of the standing CSMs aren't running again, mostly stating the huge time strain as the reason. This would somewhat alleviate it.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#157 - 2013-02-12 07:21:59 UTC
Cass Lie wrote:
As I see it, the (only) strong point in favor of revealing RL identities is the difficulty and implied legal obligation to keeping them subsequently secret.
All CCP has to do is what they're doing now. They're already keeping the identities of 300K accounts private. If they continue doing what they're doing, with regards to securing the information in our accounts, then any names that "get out" won't be because of CCP malfeasance. It'll be because the player let his identity be known, let slip some information somewhere, etc.

I think Xhagen's legal argument is a bit of a red herring.
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#158 - 2013-02-12 07:35:08 UTC  |  Edited by: rodyas
Shadoo wrote:

And no, there is no PL member I am aware of who would run if the RL disclosure wasn't in place. But there is at least one "space enemy" of ours who I'd trust to be my ambassador to 0.0 nullsec warfare who would run if the RL disclosure wasn't in place. And there have been countless others in the past, both friend and foe. Does this not concern you also?


I think the only reason I feel bad is because they would be stuck with posting in assembly hall if they didn't start running for CSM. Or better they could take up blogging or write for the EVE media sites or ask to join a podcast, if you do like their 0.0 ideas.

I mean if they have good ideas and stuff like that, be a shame to waste them. There are other ways to stay anonymous and still post them. Or if those people have no self esteem, and probably no decent or proud RL credentials there is still assembly hall waiting for them.

As for Grath, I think he is unique as in he is more scarier the more you know about him. It might be healthier for us to not know his RL name and hopefully we don't hear anymore RL stories. Innocence lost is hard to reclaim.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne

Grath Telkin
SniggWaffe
WAFFLES.
#159 - 2013-02-12 07:47:04 UTC
rodyas wrote:
[quote=Shadoo]
As for Grath, I think he is unique as in he is more scarier the more you know about him. It might be healthier for us to not know his RL name and hopefully we don't hear anymore RL stories. Innocence lost is hard to reclaim.


Cry

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#160 - 2013-02-12 08:03:49 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:


I think Xhagen's legal argument is a bit of a red herring.


Probably is, Space lawyers are very expensive (or very cheap), and CCP is only known for hiring real economists.

I might try to do some research over unpaid interns with power, or consultants that sign NDAs and such, but no payments for their advice. I mean so much work they do, but no real recompense or pay, is a bit strange for my legal thinking. Just wondering how other people/companies handle it or do the same thing.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne