These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Malcanis for CSM 8 Vote till you drop

First post
Author
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#741 - 2013-04-01 15:45:36 UTC
The other candidates were doing it and I didn't want to look uncool

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Indus Fervens
Perkone
Caldari State
#742 - 2013-04-02 05:26:14 UTC
So I just read your manifesto and I have a question/s about it.

You mention the population of Hi-sec is divided into several categories, CCP have at various times put the HS population as 65-80% of the player base.

What proportion of HS characters are null sec alts in your estimation?
Is this a problem?
What would you propose to do about it if someone handed you a junior game developer hat?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#743 - 2013-04-02 06:30:12 UTC
Indus Fervens wrote:
So I just read your manifesto and I have a question/s about it.

You mention the population of Hi-sec is divided into several categories, CCP have at various times put the HS population as 65-80% of the player base.

1- What proportion of HS characters are null sec alts in your estimation?
2 -Is this a problem?
3- What would you propose to do about it if someone handed you a junior game developer hat?


1 - There's no realistic way to get hard figures, but from the 0.0 people I talk to I think it's a reasonable assumption to say that there are at an absolute minimum 2 hi-sec alts for every 3 0.0 characters. That's a very conservative guess. As a proportion? I'm going to go with the 25-33% range.

2 - Yes it most definitely is.

3 - I discuss the issue at some length in this thread. The tl;dr is that virtually every productive industry is effectively "forced" to be in hi-sec. Unless you're RPing or just plain bad at maths, there's no reason to produce anything except ratting ammo, cap boosters and supercaps in sov 0.0. I propose a massive boost in the industrial capacity of 0.0 (which currently has just 3% of the production capacity of hi-sec) combined with an efficiency/cost rebalance to compensate 0.0 producers for the additional overhead they pay for facilities that hi-sec producers get for free.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#744 - 2013-04-02 09:14:40 UTC
I'll be publishing my recommended voting list tonight.

I promise to make you mad about at least 1 entry on it, but don't forget that you're free to partially or completely ignore it (as long as you put me as #1 choice)

And mathematically speaking, it's scrupulously fair. You actually have to work pretty hard to not get at least someone you choose into the CSM.

The big problem comes from people who don't have access to recommended voting lists from trusted sources - the amount of work required to fill all 14 slots is obviously 14x higher than that required to make a single choice. So the large, well-organised null-sec vote is going to be very heavily represented this year I think.

The big advantage of the system is that multiple "good" candidates can run for a given demographic without crippling each other; on the old system, you might see 5 excellent "small gang PvP" candidates and 1 "OK" missionbear candidate. But because the missionbear vote wasn't split, the missionbear guy would get in and the 5 excellent small gang PvP candidates would take votes from each other and not get a seat, even though their total votes might be 3-4x as many.

With STV, so long as all the "small gang" voters put all 5 of their guys on their preference list, they'll get at least one of them elected. (In fact this is exactly what's happening with the wormhole candidates).

In short: the new system rewards demographics that

(1) Vote
(2) Are well organised
(3) Put forward lots of good candidates

NB: I am going to put Mike Azariah in my recommendation list because I think we need at least 1 hi-sec guy on the CSM, if only to make sure we don't accidentally propose or agree to something that screws over hi-sec in the wrong way. And Mike seems like a level headed sensible guy who understands that the game as a whole is interconnected.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#745 - 2013-04-02 09:23:11 UTC
Incidentally, before anyone suggests it, my answer is no; "reserved" seats are a dreadful idea. The correct response for hi-sec is to start becoming more politcally aware. In the past, hi-sec inhabitants have never had much compelling incentive to communicate with each other and act in any organised fashion. There has never really been a need.

Now there is.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Beaver Retriever
Reality Sequence
#746 - 2013-04-02 13:00:48 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
NB: I am going to put Mike Azariah in my recommendation list because I think we need at least 1 hi-sec guy on the CSM, if only to make sure we don't accidentally propose or agree to something that screws over hi-sec in the wrong way. And Mike seems like a level headed sensible guy who understands that the game as a whole is interconnected.


Psychotic Monk is both the hisec candidate we deserve and need right now.

Jus' sayin'
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#747 - 2013-04-02 13:08:29 UTC
Maybe I'll endorse him too!

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Ali Aras
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#748 - 2013-04-02 17:55:15 UTC
More highsec manifesto questions -- you talk at the end about wanting some way for isk-pvp players to hit skill-pvp players. How do you think the situation of a skill-pvp group deccing a low-isk, low-skills group (e.g., a bunch of spacepoor and possibly new carebears) should be handled?

http://warp-to-sun.tumblr.com -- my blog

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#749 - 2013-04-02 18:18:26 UTC
Ali Aras wrote:
More highsec manifesto questions -- you talk at the end about wanting some way for isk-pvp players to hit skill-pvp players. How do you think the situation of a skill-pvp group deccing a low-isk, low-skills group (e.g., a bunch of spacepoor and possibly new carebears) should be handled?


There comes a point where a corp is put to the test and they have to stand or fall on their own merits. CCP have already given the group you describe the best help possible with the tiercide project that made dirt-cheap T1 frigates & cruisers into fully viable PvP ships.

A corp wholly composed of new carebears is, to be frank, a bad corp. New players should be joining exisiting groups and learning how the hell things work first.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#750 - 2013-04-02 19:02:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
Malc's recommended voting list

- Malcanis. Vote me!

I will publish the rest of my recommendations in 3 groups of 4: People I think that it's essential get elected, People I really would like to see elected, people I'd like to see elected. I'm not going to order within groups: make that decision yourselves. Many of you will be surprised that there are so many empire candidates on my recommended list, but I sincerely believe that nullsec will have all the representative power it needs if everyone on my slate were to be elected. I encourage you all to consider whether or not the CSM will do the best job of representing you by providing diversity of experitise and viewpoints or by uniformity.


Group 1:

Trebor. Trebor is our only "live link" to the previous CSMs, he has irreplaceable process and personal knowledge, he has experience in actually dealing with CCP and getting results that will otherwise take us precious time and political capital to work out for ourselves. On a personal note, he's been immensely helpful to my campaign, and without him I probably wouldn't be running. If you want to see Malc on the CSM, you should give Trebor a place on your preference list because you owe him if I do get elected.

Nathan Jameson. I think he's the pick of the W-space candidates, and his knowledge will be essential in what's going to be a very null-centric CSM

Ripard Teg. He's articulate, literate and persuasive. He has excellent experience in communicating to the EVE community, and he's in a group that practices some of the elitest PvP in the game. And he has admitted to being wrong at least once.

Mangala Solaris. A gentleman and member of RvB, he's the public face of an organisation which kept hi-sec PvP alive during the lean years and demonstrates that EVE can serve the casual player in ways that don't just mean PvEing. In many ways, Mangala & RvB are the embodiment of the principle I tried to promote with the hi-sec manifesto.


Group 2:

Mike Azariah. Mike represents a demographic that has little other chance of gaining a voice in this CSM: the little guy in hi-sec, the casual player who's not made it into a group yet, the fellow who hasn't made the connections that will give him comrades to stand beside him. Mike and I will almost certainly disagree about many things during CSM8, but that doesn't matter. He has a sensible, balanced view of EVE, he understands that the game is interconnected, and we need his voice on the CSM to make sure that Ordinary Joe doesn't get stepped on while the big buys are marching. Give Mike a place in your preference list because he's looking out for the guys that might be applying to your corp in a few months, that mine the trit for your battleships, that grind the LP for your faction ammo.

Roc Weiler. I have only just started to get to know Roc, and the delay has been my mistake and my loss. We want him on our team guys. His CSM thread doesn't do hIm justice, but that's OK; we have other good writers on the team. Roc is a guy who will make things happen.

Korvin. The Non-bloc RUS candidate we need to outreach to what is probably EVE's biggest non-English speaking community.

Psychotic Monk. Monk represents the other side of hi-sec from Mike, but this isn't Monk vs Mike, this is about making sure we have voices to represent playstyles and ensure that concerns from both side of the divide ar heard to give us a properly balanced CSM


Group 3:

Corebloodbrothers. Core has a great bottom-up perspective on 0.0 from outside the big blocs that will serve the CSM well. He's a solid PvPer, and he has the right ideas.

Mynnna. Mynnna will almost certainly not need any help from the likes of me recommending him, but why take that chance? On his own merits, he deserves a place in Group 1; I've only put him in group 3 because he has the CFC to back him. But if there's one thing I've learned in EVE it's not to take anything for granted. Mynnna brings the in-depth knowledge and intuitive understanding of large scale EVE economics that CSM8 will be crippled without. Make sure he's somewhere on your preferences.

Ali Aras. The voice of the new player, and a fine lady, we need Ali to have a balanced CSM and to provide an essential perspective from a demographic that many people make assumptions (and even Laws Blink ) about, but which is rarely heard from directly.

Unforgiven Storm. He can provide the in depth industrial expertise that I personally want at hand to drive the argument to CCP that 0.0 needs the right industrial rebalance.


Shoutout slot:

Banlish. EVE's outpost and POS expert. The POS changes announced today are a good start, but CCP has a very long road to walk before POS and 0.0 outposts are where they should be. If you live in 0.0, you want Banlish on the CSM to guide CCP on the way. Like Mynnna, Banlish probably doesn't need my support and as with Mynnna, I am not taking anything for granted.


DISCLAIMER: SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE. NO REFUNDS. NO LIABILITY IS ACCEPTED IF ONE OF MY RECOMMENDATIONS TURNS OUT TO BE A TERRIBLE FAILURE. THE VALUE OF YOUR VOTE MAY GO DOWN AS WELL AS UP.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#751 - 2013-04-02 19:12:36 UTC
Apologies for the typos. This is what comes of trying to write whilst sober. It's a mistake I am glad to have made before I get elected rather than after. I will leave them in place as a monument to my shame.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#752 - 2013-04-02 19:24:34 UTC
I'm personally of the opinion that one of your "Group 1" candidate should be drop-kicked (and they most certainly will not appear on my list), but thanks for giving me some food for thought on a few candidates I hadn't even considered.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#753 - 2013-04-02 19:31:40 UTC
Karl Hobb wrote:
I'm personally of the opinion that one of your "Group 1" candidate should be drop-kicked (and they most certainly will not appear on my list), but thanks for giving me some food for thought on a few candidates I hadn't even considered.


They're only my recommendations. I can't enforce them on anyone, and what's more, if you vote for me and then don't vote for a single candidate I listed, I will still not be ungrateful because at the end of the day, I'm campaigning for Malcanis, not those other 13 guys. I haven't even put them in strict order, I've only made my case for why I think they should be on your list

Nevertheless, I have listed the CSM I would ideally like to work within, and that list is there for you to follow or ignore or pick and choose from. You're entitled to judge me on it just as much as you are on any of my policy statements.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#754 - 2013-04-02 19:39:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Karl Hobb
Malcanis wrote:
Nevertheless, I have listed the CSM I would ideally like to work within, and that list is there for you to follow or ignore or pick and choose from. You're entitled to judge me on it just as much as you are on any of my policy statements.

I think you're taking my post a bit too seriously because it was definitely a "thank you" regarding certain candidates, but that's alright. If it helps, you're number 1 on one account and number 2 on the other and (you might end up #1 on the second account because) I'm heavily promoting you as a secondary to my corp (P Monk will end up #1 on pretty much everyone's list). Sure there's only nine accounts between us, but that's gotta count for something.

E: For instance, I am now compelled to find Roc Weiler's CS Interview, as well as Korvin's.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#755 - 2013-04-02 19:41:52 UTC
Every vote for me counts!

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Indus Fervens
Perkone
Caldari State
#756 - 2013-04-03 04:01:56 UTC
Malcanis wrote:

3 - I discuss the issue at some length in this thread. The tl;dr is that virtually every productive industry is effectively "forced" to be in hi-sec. Unless you're RPing or just plain bad at maths, there's no reason to produce anything except ratting ammo, cap boosters and supercaps in sov 0.0. I propose a massive boost in the industrial capacity of 0.0 (which currently has just 3% of the production capacity of hi-sec) combined with an efficiency/cost rebalance to compensate 0.0 producers for the additional overhead they pay for facilities that hi-sec producers get for free.

Hmmmm....so you don't think many of the null sec alts are mission/incursion running? That they are in hi-sec for the industry?
My feeling is that there are a lot of people/alts in hi-sec for the low risk highish isk/hr.

Look I know you are not running as an economic expert but where do you think ISK should be entering the game? Do you think there should be any ISK spouts in null-sec?

I was thinking about a system where vast effective isk per hour could be made in null sec but only in the form of raw materials that need to be made into something to be valuable. Much like tech moons are not isk fountains even though they make serious cash, it is only because people are prepared to pay for the tech that it is valuable. Whereas, a L4 mission runner makes 50+ mill isk/hr + salvage. (and is a isk spout)
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#757 - 2013-04-03 20:08:50 UTC
Missioning is a productive profession; it produces a relatively small net amount of pure ISK compared to the value of the wealth from the LP stores. Sorry if I didn't make that explicit.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Vilnius Zar
SDC Multi Ten
#758 - 2013-04-04 18:16:45 UTC
I don't necessarily agree with everything Malc says but I do very much like his non-bullshit and knowledgeable approach to the game, the CSM and his input in the matter. Give him your vote!
Banlish
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas. Alliance
#759 - 2013-04-04 18:17:30 UTC
Gotta say we do need Malcanis on the CSM, I've kept a very low profile up till yesterday about the CSM votes but I'll NEVER say Malcanis doesn't know this game inside and out like few do. If you aren't sure who to vote for, make sure at the very least Malcanis is on your list.

He's on of the bitter vets at EVE that instead of just remaining bitter, is proactive. Who wouldn't want that?
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#760 - 2013-04-04 18:29:37 UTC
I strongly endorse this candidate! Good luck!!

Issler