These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Dev Blog: CSM 9 Results!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Darin Vanar
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#301 - 2014-05-11 23:38:00 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
there is plenty of room for diversity

ccp is not at fault if the diversity does not present itself

or perhaps the diversity which you think exists does not actually exist

makes you think huh


This was my first time voting at a CSM election. It will be interesting what happens next year.
Frying Doom
#302 - 2014-05-11 23:46:49 UTC
My biggest gripe about the CSM is not actually about the CSM.

It is about CCP, they use the CSM as an excuse to not have to communicate with the playerbase as a whole.

I mean Yes they post things at us, but they rarely communicate with us. I mean why do they have to they have a CSM to communicate with and they obviously represent the whole community right? well no they represent an ever shrinking section of the voting community.

I personally saw no need to vote this year as the CSM seems more worried about access than with bringing up player concerns.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#303 - 2014-05-12 00:06:27 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:


I personally saw no need to vote this year as the CSM seems more worried about access than with bringing up player concerns.


In spite of that, if you bring up a concern to me and it look solid I will kick it up the ladder, just the same.

. . . so there :p

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Darin Vanar
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#304 - 2014-05-12 00:13:11 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:


I personally saw no need to vote this year as the CSM seems more worried about access than with bringing up player concerns.


In spite of that, if you bring up a concern to me and it look solid I will kick it up the ladder, just the same.

. . . so there :p

m


Now that's the spirit! :)
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#305 - 2014-05-12 00:18:41 UTC
Said it before, will say it again.

Mandatory suffrage.

Of course, the cartels would then just game that system by floating a huge slate of candidates, so even if every person voted randomly, the cartel agenda would still control the CSM, and CCP.

I am just sitting back, watching the PCU slide, CCP refusing to release the numbers required to calculate the subscription base.
And of course, hearing how suddenly, the paradigm that lead to supposedly 10 straight years of growth, is broken.

I wonder what has changed in the past 12-18 months?
It certainly can't be because of the consolidation and stagnation of null sec, and the ongoing assault on high sec players reaching a tipping point.

No, because that is not what has happened, right?
CCP has not been pounding away at high sec with ever increasing brutality, while creating even more game mechanics that make null sec war even more unlikely.

Yes, I wholeheartedly support CCP continuing to listen to the their cartel advisers and continue down the path they are on. That is clearly the way to turn around the ship.

Oh, BTW, just what is the over/under on when goons and pandemic legion enhance the BOTlord agrreement to include not attacking each other's industrial cores, plus the industrial cores of the serfs on each other's empires?
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#306 - 2014-05-12 00:29:19 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:

Oh, BTW, just what is the over/under on when goons and pandemic legion enhance the BOTlord agrreement to include not attacking each other's industrial cores, plus the industrial cores of the serfs on each other's empires?

considering the existing agreement already covers this despite not having predicted it in any way beforehand, i'd say it's pretty damn likely
Frying Doom
#307 - 2014-05-12 00:40:38 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:


I personally saw no need to vote this year as the CSM seems more worried about access than with bringing up player concerns.


In spite of that, if you bring up a concern to me and it look solid I will kick it up the ladder, just the same.

. . . so there :p

m

That is exactly the point. The CSM is acting as a barrier to CCP and the end result is that CCP do not feel the need to communicate properly with the playerbase like so many other games.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#308 - 2014-05-12 00:43:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Dinsdale Pirannha
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:

Oh, BTW, just what is the over/under on when goons and pandemic legion enhance the BOTlord agrreement to include not attacking each other's industrial cores, plus the industrial cores of the serfs on each other's empires?

considering the existing agreement already covers this despite not having predicted it in any way beforehand, i'd say it's pretty damn likely


So yeah, I can certainly see null sec tensions reaching a boiling point soon.
I mean, with the cartels just handed another huge enhancement in their industrial income stream, the cartels will certainly be MORE inclined to attack each other and risk said streams, just like they have with their serf empires..wait, that did not come out right.
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#309 - 2014-05-12 00:50:38 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

That is exactly the point. The CSM is acting as a barrier to CCP and the end result is that CCP do not feel the need to communicate properly with the playerbase like so many other games.


You say barrier, I say filter.

CCP does need to work and cannot pause to listen to every idea that comes down the pike. Stroll through assembly hall, GD, and F & I for a bit. Should ALL those ideas be something that CCP needs to react to, again and again and again?

If you think I won't be the right guy to take your idea forward then write directly to one of the other 13 people on the council. If all of us dislike your idea . . . well then maybe it needs a rewrite or you can start a threadnaught in the forums to make CCP listen.

Me . . . a barrier.

no

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#310 - 2014-05-12 00:59:51 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:


I personally saw no need to vote this year as the CSM seems more worried about access than with bringing up player concerns.


In spite of that, if you bring up a concern to me and it look solid I will kick it up the ladder, just the same.

. . . so there :p

m


Really?
And I suppose all the stuff I posted on your blog, Jester's blog, and the forums in general made it to CCP's eager ear?

Like waiting on delivering half-baked this industrial debacle to TQ, in less than 4 weeks, with so many unanswered questions, instead of taking the summer to properly test it?

The only idea that came before CCP via the CSM was my idea in F&I about the large clouds.
And we have seen how much CCP has done with that idea, though it has met with uniform praise from PVE and PVP players alike.

You know, if you have any real backbone, you, being the supposed high sec casual player champion, would start RIGHT NOW recruiting other high sec players to join the ballot, and form a coalition, just like all the null sec cartel propagandists so sarcastically suggest. That way, when it fails, you can point to it and say to all, it is truly impossible to do with high sec what the cartels and CCP say can be done.

And before anyone says I should put my money where my mouth is, I have explained before that I will not put my name out there for real life harassment nor when my name is googled by future employers, I don't want it associated with a video game.
And further, I am far too polarizing a figure, and would be VERY "unprofessional" with any dealings with the CSM cartel reps and their lackeys.
KuroVolt
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#311 - 2014-05-12 01:18:09 UTC  |  Edited by: KuroVolt
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
start RIGHT NOW recruiting other high sec players to join the ballot, and form a coalition.

This actually is not a bad idea, and a strategy the current HS CSM representatives should seriously concider.

I personally wouldnt mind seeing more HS representation on the CSM, provided they do not overlap too much.

I am curious however if that would truly be enough to end the crying of the general masses.

BoBwins Law: As a discussion/war between two large nullsec entities grows longer, the probability of one comparing the other to BoB aproaches near certainty.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#312 - 2014-05-12 02:39:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Weaselior
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:


I personally saw no need to vote this year as the CSM seems more worried about access than with bringing up player concerns.


In spite of that, if you bring up a concern to me and it look solid I will kick it up the ladder, just the same.

. . . so there :p

m


Really?
And I suppose all the stuff I posted on your blog, Jester's blog, and the forums in general made it to CCP's eager ear?

Like waiting on delivering half-baked this industrial debacle to TQ, in less than 4 weeks, with so many unanswered questions, instead of taking the summer to properly test it?

The only idea that came before CCP via the CSM was my idea in F&I about the large clouds.
And we have seen how much CCP has done with that idea, though it has met with uniform praise from PVE and PVP players alike.

You know, if you have any real backbone, you, being the supposed high sec casual player champion, would start RIGHT NOW recruiting other high sec players to join the ballot, and form a coalition, just like all the null sec cartel propagandists so sarcastically suggest. That way, when it fails, you can point to it and say to all, it is truly impossible to do with high sec what the cartels and CCP say can be done.

And before anyone says I should put my money where my mouth is, I have explained before that I will not put my name out there for real life harassment nor when my name is googled by future employers, I don't want it associated with a video game.
And further, I am far too polarizing a figure, and would be VERY "unprofessional" with any dealings with the CSM cartel reps and their lackeys.


but since we, as the rmt cartels, control ccp and therefore have access to it anyway aren't you already risking that

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
beakerax
Pator Tech School
#313 - 2014-05-12 02:43:43 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
You know, if you have any real backbone, you, being the supposed high sec casual player champion, would start RIGHT NOW recruiting other high sec players to join the ballot, and form a coalition…

…I have explained before that I will not put my name out there for real life harassment nor when my name is googled by future employers, I don't want it associated with a video game.

You do realize that you wouldn't actually have to run for CSM in order to organize other players, yes? It's not as though the leaders of the null-sec 'cartels' were on the ballot this year.
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
#314 - 2014-05-12 03:08:32 UTC
Is there a statistic of how many of fanfest attending accounts did vote? Blink

"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X

"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron

-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-
Dalilus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#315 - 2014-05-12 03:22:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Dalilus
I did not vote this year as the results were predictable and have no need to look at the results to assume who won. Winners: nullbears, lowsequers and Wholers. I bet NO ONE imagined what the results were going to be, Roll. Why vote to legitimize a CSM that is hellbent/will be hellbent on nerfing my highsec playstyle? No need to bulk up the number of votes cast by drone grunts with my own so their alliances can justify with a straight face keeping their BWAAAAAAmbulance making the rounds demanding content ONLY for themselves and then nerfing everything else because "players voted" and they won.

For someone to say that votes were not cast because of lack of knowledge or awareness is laughable, in my opinion votes were not cast for lack of interest and/or not to support the direction the "sandbox" is being taken. Players that abstained knew full well what they were doing....
Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate
#316 - 2014-05-12 03:45:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Dirk MacGirk
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:

Oh, BTW, just what is the over/under on when goons and pandemic legion enhance the BOTlord agrreement to include not attacking each other's industrial cores, plus the industrial cores of the serfs on each other's empires?

considering the existing agreement already covers this despite not having predicted it in any way beforehand, i'd say it's pretty damn likely


So yeah, I can certainly see null sec tensions reaching a boiling point soon.
I mean, with the cartels just handed another huge enhancement in their industrial income stream, the cartels will certainly be MORE inclined to attack each other and risk said streams, just like they have with their serf empires..wait, that did not come out right.



Just asking, so don't go all crazy: do you have a blog or someplace where you have outlined your views with any semblance of detail and specifics? Because I see quite a few remarks from you on how this indy change is the death of hisec and a boon for null, when I don't see evidence that null is being handed some grand buff. Harder in all places? Yep. But if you've outlined it somewhere it detail, I would enjoy reading the evidence behind the charge.

As for you not running, but challenging Mike Azariah to form some sort of hisec political bloc, I totally understand your choice to not run. But that doesn't preclude you from forming the same sort of hisec party, does it?

Hisec, nullsec, lowsec: none of these labels matches up with any particular subset of voters just because they hail from a particular part of space. It's ludicrous to think otherwise and all the tinfoillery doesn't change the fact that the CSM doesn't control enough sway to get CCP to willingly destroy one populated part of space in order to accommodate another. If they did, I'm quite certain the average player living in nullsec wouldn't be as disgruntled as every other player in the game.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#317 - 2014-05-12 05:16:01 UTC
please don't encourage him to write a blog it'd probably get all the highsec carebears talking like he does
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#318 - 2014-05-12 05:24:45 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
please don't encourage him to write a blog it'd probably get all the highsec carebears talking like he does


Benny, that hurts

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Darin Vanar
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#319 - 2014-05-12 07:02:57 UTC
EvE just wouldn't be the same without Dinsdale.

I would totally subscribe to the blog right this second.

I'm sad to hear that you won't run.... I have invested in a few 5000m3 crates of 'Dinsdale was right!' buttons, and some of that expensive Gallente champagne (don't ask how I acquired it), but I guess they'll never see the light of day.

But we still have Mike to represent us, he seems willing to forward our concerns to CCP, and that at least is a small victory, no?
Frying Doom
#320 - 2014-05-12 07:42:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Mike Azariah wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

That is exactly the point. The CSM is acting as a barrier to CCP and the end result is that CCP do not feel the need to communicate properly with the playerbase like so many other games.


You say barrier, I say filter.

CCP does need to work and cannot pause to listen to every idea that comes down the pike. Stroll through assembly hall, GD, and F & I for a bit. Should ALL those ideas be something that CCP needs to react to, again and again and again?

If you think I won't be the right guy to take your idea forward then write directly to one of the other 13 people on the council. If all of us dislike your idea . . . well then maybe it needs a rewrite or you can start a threadnaught in the forums to make CCP listen.

Me . . . a barrier.

no

m

And that is why this game does not grow.
Every year the communication between CCP and the players gets smaller and smaller, why because the CSM is there to do that.

Actually it is CCPs job to listen to its customers and not implement a strategy where they can for the most part ignore them. The fact that to be heard you have to send a message to a CSM, who may or may not ignore you, then to all the other CSMs who may do the same and then even if they do like the idea they are actively discouraged from having pet projects, so a player needs to make a thread naught or without the CSM players just talk on the forums and devs and other CCP staff respond.

Your very presence is a barrier, the CSMs existence is a barrier. I can honestly say I am not surprised you are unable to see that.

The reality of the situation is, you have CCP sitting their going "Why are we having trouble keeping veteran and new players after all we do not communicate with them very little?"

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!