These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why CSM?

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#161 - 2014-01-21 01:19:42 UTC
Kesthely wrote:
I am an ERP-Programmer (Enterprise Resource Programmer) in real life. That means i have to talk to the people in charge and ask them what they want to have steamlined in their company from intial order to product aftercare, and everything that has to do with it.

In that respect (EvE Online is still a product of a company) i have a good inside knowledge of how an advisory organ (wich ERP programmers are an integral part off) benefits a company, or even specific products of a company. CSM is just like that. It isn't a customer care devision, nor a development devision, its an advisory organ wich needs to stay on the outside and have a unique view to the company and or its product in order to work.


A rant about personal background? Not sure what you are getting at here. You basically just summarized what CSM is intended to be and used your background to justify it.

Furthermore - ERP is generally about streamlining an already defined process eg a manufacturing line or some other sort of "large" interconnected project. I have never heard it being used to decide which particular task to undertake given a super open ended problem.

That falls more in line with the discipline of market research, of which the primary tool is the poll or other forms of data collection.

Kesthely wrote:
For them The CSM works. They give the information THEY want, in a format THEY are content with, in a timeframe and cost they are happy with. How do i know that? Not because One employee says so, not because one CSM members says so, but because CCP is still a company. If it would not work for them, the CSM would not exist.


So you're saying any company that does any activity inefficiently would not otherwise exist?

If this were true, you wouldn't be able to get work within your own profession.

Kesthely wrote:
If there was a cheaper alternative, they would choose so. Thats what companies do. They look at the cost effectiveness, and scratch additional expenses.


If they were perfect, sure. Everybody is optimal in a perfect world.

Kesthely wrote:
They don't NEED YOUR input, they don't NEED any players input. Because at the end of the day its their product, that your simply buying. They have the CSM, a large contributary force in the way of CCP members CSM members and GM's that in and outside of the game try to awnser your questions, keep you informed of whats happening, and ask for your input because THEY want to.


Sure, they don't "need" any input -- they just happen to seek it out because it affects their bottom line (subscribers). Meaning, it is profitable for them to seek input, so they seek it.

Kesthely wrote:
So show just a -LITTLE- respect, and instead of ONLY looking at it your way, try to see it from their shoes.

CCP isn't perfect, CSM isn't perfect, but guess what, thats because there People! What i'm thankfull off, and i hope that many of the other players are as well, in the effort to have this continued dialog.


Just because I don't agree doesn't mean I can't see it from any other perspective. I could reverse the same argument and say it to you - which is what makes it such a silly argument.....There is nothing really attached to it.
CCP Dolan
C C P
C C P Alliance
#162 - 2014-01-21 02:41:32 UTC
I'm not going to go back and multi-quote, simply because it's going to get rather lengthy and my points will share a large number of similarities.

It essentially boils down to this, as you noted before I am a community rep, but I am also the coordinator for the CSM project. I have all of the relevant data for the work that the CSM does, and while members of the community might be able to take educated guesses as to how the CSM process functions, and the cost-reward paradigm behind it, they are only guesses.

I know exactly how much the project costs. I know exactly how much all of our polls cost to perform, and the quality and usefulness of the data they produce. I know the effects on response rate and answer quality of repeated polling of the same pool of people. I know how our forum metric data works, and what sort of information we can gather from that. I know how long it takes to read a feedback thread, and the manpower involved in sorting good feedback from bad. I know all the steps in the development process, and all of the EVE developers. I know how many developer ideas the CSM sees that either change drastically or are cut as a result of feedback, and that those will generally (and quite purposefully) never be seen or mentioned to the public without the developers and I's go ahead.

I will always readily admit that there is an ongoing issue of how much of the CSM process we show to the public, and how much we keep behind the NDA, because one of the primary values in the CSM's existence is that our developers conversations with them are private. I will however say that, the only things you will ever see about the CSM process come from CCP, and the mouths of CSM members past and present. If you chose not to believe what we tell you, then you have literally no facts to work with, and if you chose to believe only some of what we tell you, then you are making delusional justifications just to support your own assumptions and guesses.

CCP Dolan | Community Representative

Twitter: @CCPDolan

Gooby pls
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#163 - 2014-01-21 05:19:35 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:

There's nothing slippery about it. Beneficial. What you're doing is something even worse than a slippery slope. You're being deliberately obtuse and arguing about definitions.

At least Dolan bothered to look a few examples up....

of course it is, you're a bad arguer who changes what you're talking about every post and treats facts like vampires treat sunlight

when you start using a phrase like "singularly beneficial" everyone knows why you've started talking oddly randomly

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#164 - 2014-01-21 05:52:21 UTC
CCP Dolan wrote:
I'm not going to go back and multi-quote, simply because it's going to get rather lengthy and my points will share a large number of similarities.

It essentially boils down to this, as you noted before I am a community rep, but I am also the coordinator for the CSM project. I have all of the relevant data for the work that the CSM does, and while members of the community might be able to take educated guesses as to how the CSM process functions, and the cost-reward paradigm behind it, they are only guesses.

I know exactly how much the project costs. I know exactly how much all of our polls cost to perform, and the quality and usefulness of the data they produce. I know the effects on response rate and answer quality of repeated polling of the same pool of people. I know how our forum metric data works, and what sort of information we can gather from that. I know how long it takes to read a feedback thread, and the manpower involved in sorting good feedback from bad. I know all the steps in the development process, and all of the EVE developers. I know how many developer ideas the CSM sees that either change drastically or are cut as a result of feedback, and that those will generally (and quite purposefully) never be seen or mentioned to the public without the developers and I's go ahead.

I will always readily admit that there is an ongoing issue of how much of the CSM process we show to the public, and how much we keep behind the NDA, because one of the primary values in the CSM's existence is that our developers conversations with them are private. I will however say that, the only things you will ever see about the CSM process come from CCP, and the mouths of CSM members past and present. If you chose not to believe what we tell you, then you have literally no facts to work with, and if you chose to believe only some of what we tell you, then you are making delusional justifications just to support your own assumptions and guesses.


The discussion talking about the costs of polling is fairly headache-inducing. You do realize the entire CSM process is essentially a poll, except with a very small sample size and a much higher repetition rate per person compared to normal polls?

Regardless, you pretty much nailed my own point home when you admitted that the CSM process has zero external accountability.

You then conclude the situation with: "you have no choice but to believe us." Color me unconvinced. Not a very strong argument. I realize from your point of view it's very convincing, but given that I can't do a Mind Meld with CCP Dolan, I can't really verify what you are saying.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#165 - 2014-01-21 08:06:14 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
Pinky Hops wrote:


You then conclude the situation with: "you have no choice but to believe us." Color me unconvinced. Not a very strong argument. I realize from your point of view it's very convincing, but given that I can't do a Mind Meld with CCP Dolan, I can't really verify what you are saying.


Well, I guess you're **** out of luck then. May I suggest you stop bad posting, or trolling, whichever it is?

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#166 - 2014-01-21 09:11:40 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
CCP Dolan wrote:
The citation is me, I was in all of those summit meetings, and in fact all of the meetings the CSM attends. Additionally, all of those times the minutes said "we'll continue this discussion in a forum thread", I see those too. I talk to our development teams every day.


I can't really trust this or take this seriously. If the impact was as big as you say, it would be easily recognizable outside of just taking a community rep's word for it.

CCP Dolan wrote:
Once again, I was there. The CSM took these projects from "not on the roadmap" to "on the roadmap". I'm not saying that it's the only way it could have happened, they probably would have been done eventually in some future expansion, but the CSM advocated for a thing that people wanted and got it put on the roadmap, regardless of whose idea they were advocating.


It's a cute example, but I don't see this is as anything that couldn't have been accomplished quicker and more easily by just cataloging the ideas and doing a steady regimen of community polling. Very rapidly the most important and good suggestions would rise to the top.

In fact, it would probably be far more efficient than having a random gaggle of biased talking heads from the in-game "political arena" - assuming your goal is to extract the best ideas from a large set of ruandom ideas.

Which leads us to:

CCP Dolan wrote:
This is actually one of the few areas where community opinion doesn't actually matter. It's CCP's call, and a pretty hard fact that the CSM saves us money. I know how much money I spend on the CSM every year and I know how much value they bring to the table. Ultimately, even if the community stopped running as candidates, and everyone stopped voting, I'd figure out some way to fill what is essentially the same value niche, but there is no guarantee it would work as well and all of the alternatives we've ever looked at are more expensive.


This sounds pretty defensive. There are a lot of different ways to gather information on what kinds of things would be beneficial to the game whilst also being enjoyable and engaging to the players. You guys barely even poll -- which is quite a leap to make considering there's this expensive and complicated "CSM" system.

Am I saying polling beats elected representation in all forms? No - of course not...But when you suggest that "everything is more expensive" and you barely even use some of the cheapest and most cost effective tools in industry....Well, it becomes hard to take your defensiveness seriously.

Weaselior wrote:
he's assuming, correctly, that's a term of art you've created that you're going to redefine so it doesn't apply to anything that you're presented with, so he's asking you to commit to a definition and then will skewer you with it because your point is bad and you can't support it without slippery definitions


There's nothing slippery about it. Beneficial. What you're doing is something even worse than a slippery slope. You're being deliberately obtuse and arguing about definitions.

At least Dolan bothered to look a few examples up....



Then it should be very easy for you to provide a couple of hypothetical examples. "I would accept that the CSM is beneficial if they hhad achieved something like x or advocated for something like y".

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Count Nooblianos
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#167 - 2014-01-21 10:32:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Count Nooblianos
Pinky Hops when minority gobby self-serving player like you get direct control of a mmo we end up with the swg effect where the devs listened to every whine and nerfed the game to death with in 2 years of launch. The fact that Eve has been going strong for 10 years suggests that CCP have a good if not perfect system of game management. I suspect therefore that your real gripe is that you aren't getting it all your own way, well that's life mate.
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Templis CALSF
#168 - 2014-01-21 10:33:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Alekseyev Karrde
Pinky Hops wrote:

The discussion talking about the costs of polling is fairly headache-inducing. You do realize the entire CSM process is essentially a poll, except with a very small sample size and a much higher repetition rate per person compared to normal polls?

Regardless, you pretty much nailed my own point home when you admitted that the CSM process has zero external accountability.

You then conclude the situation with: "you have no choice but to believe us." Color me unconvinced. Not a very strong argument. I realize from your point of view it's very convincing, but given that I can't do a Mind Meld with CCP Dolan, I can't really verify what you are saying.

A. Except it's not a poll. Nor even an elaborate approximation of one. You can ask questions with a poll, but whatever you're polling cant ask you questions back. You cant evolve a discussion with a poll. And as has been noted by several people with, you know, actual real-world experience designing, paying for, and using polls they are quite pricey and labor intensive to have any value. This is in contrast with the CSM process, as stated clearly and several times by literally the person in CCP whose job it is to know that.

B. Except that the CSM is externally accountable, with regular elections informed by info and analysis from CCP, the CSM itself, town halls/direct interaction with reps, and player-based bloggers/media.

C. You can, of course, continue not to believe one of the most authoritative sources of information on the subject you are talking about whenever his statements, in line with statements from CSM participants past+present as well as the multitude of normal people in this thread, disagree with your unsubstantiated assumptions. After all, why pretend facts are real when it's quite possible none of this is real. If you think about it, how would you know? What *is* real, really? Goodnight Night Vale. Goodnight.

As an aside, for the sake of your CEO and corpmates I hope they dont rely on you to do anything important...

Alek the Kidnapper, Hero of the CSM
Bi-Mi Lansatha
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#169 - 2014-01-21 10:47:06 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
CCP Dolan wrote:
Pinky Hops wrote:
If by "involved" you mean being given a presentation, sure. The minutes didn't show much of anything in terms of CSM's offering meaningful input or influencing decisions. A few questions here and there. The occasional joke.

I have no way to verify any of your claims. Basically....{citation needed}


The citation is me, I was in all of those summit meetings, and in fact all of the meetings the CSM attends. Additionally, all of those times the minutes said "we'll continue this discussion in a forum thread", I see those too. I talk to our development teams every day. Here is the citation:

"The CSM was involved in every feature released in Rubicon." -CCP Dolan, 2014.
CCP Dolan | Community Representative



I can't really trust this or take this seriously...


Lol
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
#170 - 2014-01-21 11:26:27 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Dasola wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Crumplecorn wrote:
The CSM speaks for the majority so what you are essentially saying is that CCP should listen to you over the majority.

Unless you are a game designer at CCP, this does not hold true.


The CSM speaks for and represents the majority of those who voted, to infer from this that they speak for the majority of players is pure speculation on your part.



Good point, those that voted. Witch is what? Less then 10% of subscriptions of this game.

In any democracy that low vote turnout would mean re-election in a month. Yeah, really democratically chosen representation.

No wonder they drive just power blocks interest to be richer and more in power. They don't need to care of those 90% that did int vote. 90% that their message did int appeal.


It was 14%, IIRC.

That means, by your own analysis, that the "power blocs" only controlled 14% of the vote.

The people you're whining that are "unrepresented" could outvote the so-called power blocs 6 times over if only they could be arsed to stop whoring LP for 10 minutes and vote.

If they don't care enough to do even that, if they have so few problems that it's not with a few minutes of their time to express a wish to participate even so briefly, then why should any space-politician be interested in what they want? Why wouldn't we concentrate on representing those who do have problems, who are invested enough to participate, who are interested enough that they care about the game.

Can you point to a single prior example of you showing any interest in EVE other than fattening your personal wallet and stopping your personal ship getting shot at?

No?

Then why should I or anyone else give two ***** about you?


AND This is why I Vote For you. Because You, Mynna and a few other CSM's Stay True in all forms. Don't hold back, Pull punches, and speak True to your form.
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
#171 - 2014-01-21 11:48:48 UTC
There is more then just the CSM to represent us. CCP Often opens up Polls that it emails players to Take. I receive many of them. It asks like 40-80 questions and on each page has a write in box on ways you think could be done better. If you look at the Eve Launcher They had a Poll open to everyone about Eve's Industry. It's still up there to take. The CSM had Surveys go out where we all Voted on things to be put into effect. Alot of it went into effect, some of it didnt. The CSM's yes Represent all parts of EVE. Not just an individual, but a group. JUST like any other Political situation. Groups of people Vote, either a large Coalition that I am part of, or a smaller group. Only recently did I join the CFC, Prior to that I was an Avid Carebear and casual PVPer in Hi-Sec. I follow the EVE META largely since I joined the game in 09. The Different Blogs players have, to the different News websites. WE all VOTE ( the ones that care for EVE) during the CSM runs. We read all the info, check the backgrounds of the players, see what they have been involved with on the different meta levels and on the forums. I base my vote off that. You can contact them on here, on Twitter, Most social groups. They are VERY active and Reply to those quickly for the most part. If you feel under-represented It's because you are NOT making an attempt to be represented.

1) Read the Emails CCP sends you, If they invite you into a Survey.. TAKE IT.. thats them ASKING YOU DIRECTLY Your oppinion.

2) RUN for CSM, Bust your Butt and become someone for the community worth listening to. Not every CSM member was voted in by the Huge Coalitions in some form of Tin foil Rigging.

3) VOTE, Get your ass out there and help get who you want incharge into office

4) USE THE FORUMS, Features and Ideas, Jita corner like here, Or other parts. Those Devs are ALL over and responding to players.

If your not using the options available to you, then yes, Your not represented, ONLY because you chose not to be. Because You could not give a **** enough to get involved with EVE's Expansive community. The Dev's, CSM, Player base are extremely Involved in this game. IF your not, your missing out on what makes EVE great. It's an immersive game.
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#172 - 2014-01-21 13:51:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
mynnna wrote:
Pinky Hops wrote:


You then conclude the situation with: "you have no choice but to believe us." Color me unconvinced. Not a very strong argument. I realize from your point of view it's very convincing, but given that I can't do a Mind Meld with CCP Dolan, I can't really verify what you are saying.


Well, I guess you're **** out of luck then. May I suggest you stop bad posting, or trolling, whichever it is?


Usually bad posting consists of posting zero content and coupling it with ad hominem.

Kind of like your post. But I guess that's not much surprise from your typical CSM....

Judging from the summer minutes, your contributions there were similar.
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#173 - 2014-01-21 14:10:20 UTC
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
A. Except it's not a poll. Nor even an elaborate approximation of one. You can ask questions with a poll, but whatever you're polling cant ask you questions back. You cant evolve a discussion with a poll.


This is grasping at straws. The idea is to use every tool available to you extensively and to their best ability -- not to toss out all tools in favor of one random one that doesn't work all that well, or only gives you a biased result.

I brought up polls because CCP barely uses them and they are dirt cheap to create and analyze (or should be - unless you are doing something horrifically wrong) -- and CCP Dolan specifically brought up price.

So to bring up price, while barely even using the most cost effective tools in industry is basically a troll...
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
And as has been noted by several people with, you know, actual real-world experience designing, paying for, and using polls they are quite pricey and labor intensive to have any value. This is in contrast with the CSM process, as stated clearly and several times by literally the person in CCP whose job it is to know that.


I'm not really what your point is here, besides repeating points that I already debunked. Polls are not expensive. The CSM process is. The people defending the CSM process are mostly the actors themselves.

It's like a project manager arguing the benefits of his own project. Very credible.

Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
B. Except that the CSM is externally accountable, with regular elections informed by info and analysis from CCP, the CSM itself, town halls/direct interaction with reps, and player-based bloggers/media.


You're directly contradicting CCP Dolan, who just stated that any data that could hold the process accountable is not externally available....And thus, it's not an accountable process.

Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
After all, why pretend facts are real when it's quite possible none of this is real.


I think you and several other people in this thread have a very wrong definition of what a "fact" is. Facts have evidence to back them up, not what amounts to stories.
Lady Areola Fappington
#174 - 2014-01-21 18:55:09 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:

I brought up polls because CCP barely uses them and they are dirt cheap to create and analyze (or should be - unless you are doing something horrifically wrong) -- and CCP Dolan specifically brought up price.




Stopped reading there. As someone who had to get a poll developed for work, the damn things are expensive as hell. Just getting the wording right on the questions to prevent bias creep, while still getting the info you need.

Here's an example:
"Should we allow teenagers access to booze" vs.
"Should we lower the drinking age to 18, with parental consent?"

If the person doing your poll questions already has a bias against lowering the drinking age, they'd be more likely to use the first question over the second. That stuff needs checked, which is man-hours of work, which costs $$$.

Then we get into actually collecting, preparing, and putting raw numbers into a format that can be used (again remembering, numbers can say anything we want as long as we phrase the questions right), and bang, you have a nightmare.

The CSM, at least, is a smaller group who can provide direct feedback and reasons behind their ideas and responses to dev questions.

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Templis CALSF
#175 - 2014-01-21 20:02:00 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
I think you and several other people in this thread have a very wrong definition of what a "fact" is

I imagine there are many people that do not share your definition of what a fact is.

For instance, you consider "polls are not expensive, the CSM is" to be a fact. Those of us who fancy reality-based statements understand the opposite to be true.

Thankfully for the rest of us, while it is fun to probe the depths of your delusion for personal and communal amusement, convincing you is more of an Achievement rather than a requirement. Like the rest of the CSM forum trolls and tin foil loony toons we can at the end of the day simply ignore you.

Alek the Kidnapper, Hero of the CSM
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#176 - 2014-01-21 21:02:30 UTC
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
Stopped reading there. As someone who had to get a poll developed for work, the damn things are expensive as hell. Just getting the wording right on the questions to prevent bias creep, while still getting the info you need.

Here's an example:
"Should we allow teenagers access to booze" vs.
"Should we lower the drinking age to 18, with parental consent?"

If the person doing your poll questions already has a bias against lowering the drinking age, they'd be more likely to use the first question over the second. That stuff needs checked, which is man-hours of work, which costs $$$.


So basically you are saying that taking bias out of a poll costs money, but taking bias out of the CSM system does not?

Or are you saying that it's OK for the CSM system to be biased, but not polls?

Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
Then we get into actually collecting, preparing, and putting raw numbers into a format that can be used (again remembering, numbers can say anything we want as long as we phrase the questions right), and bang, you have a nightmare.


Most of this and more already has to be applied to the CSM system. Perhaps a bit less of raw number analysis - but it's not like that's a particularly time consuming process relative to everything else. Cataloging their input, transcribing the crap they say from videos....Organizing everything, prioritizing....All the preparation before hand...

Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
For instance, you consider "polls are not expensive, the CSM is" to be a fact. Those of us who fancy reality-based statements understand the opposite to be true.

Thankfully for the rest of us, while it is fun to probe the depths of your delusion for personal and communal amusement, convincing you is more of an Achievement rather than a requirement. Like the rest of the CSM forum trolls and tin foil loony toons we can at the end of the day simply ignore you.


Interesting reality you live in.

A reality of free developer time, free plane tickets, free lunch, and perhaps free vacation. Perhaps everything is free, which is why polls are expensive? Wait - that doesn't make sense. I'm having trouble following you because you didn't really state anything even remotely resembling reality.

In the reality I live in, statisticians of the level requires to make a simple poll are a dirt-cheap, contract hire, and often local if you are in a city. They can be trained on the subject matter relatively quickly (within a week or two) and require little oversight other than reading their drafts and slapping them on the wrist if they overstep their bounds on analysis.

You're talking like you need to hire a Nate Silver to write a poll about EVE Online.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#177 - 2014-01-21 22:54:49 UTC
a worthless poll is cheap, therefore ccp should spend money on polls that generate no useful information but are cheaper than anything that generates useful information - pinky hops, business legend

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Kesthely
Ailio Industries
Blood Eagle Syndicate
#178 - 2014-01-22 02:18:17 UTC
I am just wondering, why do you even have this debate?

I mean -Clearly- you know better, why haven't you started your own company and designed your own game? I mean the fact that your always right should make investors happy you would have no problems getting a company started? And since your always right you can make a game that everyone enjoys includeing yourself?

So why are you even bothering with this game?
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#179 - 2014-01-22 02:54:20 UTC
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:

fun fact, australia only lowered the drinking (and voting) age to 18 to match the age of conscription
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#180 - 2014-01-23 04:42:06 UTC
Kesthely wrote:
I am just wondering, why do you even have this debate?

I mean -Clearly- you know better, why haven't you started your own company and designed your own game? I mean the fact that your always right should make investors happy you would have no problems getting a company started? And since your always right you can make a game that everyone enjoys includeing yourself?

So why are you even bothering with this game?


You know this is a bad argument when it works on any and all criticism of the game as a whole.

"What, you don't like walking in stations? Go make your own game then!"

If CCP operated the way you suggest, EVE would be dead by now.

Also remember that although EVE has been around for a long time, it also has a history of having some of the most corrupt development staff of any MMO in the history of gaming - which is why zero external accountability is probably bad.