These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Vote Xenuria: CSM 11 - Reform The CSM

Author
Xenuria
#61 - 2016-01-08 21:24:13 UTC
Content isn't being rationed by goons, there isn't more of it up californi-way.
Seraph IX Basarab
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#62 - 2016-01-08 21:34:20 UTC
On page 4 and I'm not sure what you are about. You kind of just seem like a gimmick to be honest.
Xenuria
#63 - 2016-01-08 21:42:25 UTC
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:
On page 4 and I'm not sure what you are about. You kind of just seem like a gimmick to be honest.


Do you have a question about my campaign?
Seraph IX Basarab
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#64 - 2016-01-08 22:24:33 UTC
List 3 ways you plan to reform the CSM.
Xenuria
#65 - 2016-01-08 22:27:58 UTC
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:
List 3 ways you plan to reform the CSM.


I already did, please check the first page of the thread where I talk about white paper reform and related systems.
Seraph IX Basarab
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#66 - 2016-01-08 22:32:23 UTC
Xenuria wrote:
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:
List 3 ways you plan to reform the CSM.


I already did, please check the first page of the thread where I talk about white paper reform and related systems.



Yeah I did that. So your relevant parts:

"Reform in the context of the CSM would entail overhauling the white paper, installing safety measures, changing the language used when discussing certain topics, advocating and pushing for policy changes that encourage honesty but discourage superficial posturing. I suppose the problem is that when I say Reform I expect people to know what I mean without me having to list any number of things that are reformative.

For me it's sometimes difficult for me to explain what I mean without a specific context. Let me give you an example.


Q What are your reforms?
A Uhhh

Q How would you reform the CSM NDA?
A I would construct a spanning tree rubric with dates and subject tags that allowed for everybody under NDA to know explicitly what they are and are not allowed to discuss and with whom. "


1. Overhauling the white paper.

In what way?

2. Installing Safety Measures.

Such as?

3. Changing the language used when discussing topics.

Changing the language from what to what?

4. Advocating policies that encourage honesty but discourage superficial posturing.

"discourage superficial posturing"...could start with your posts.
xXFreshnessXx
Segmentum Solar
#67 - 2016-01-09 01:10:19 UTC
I've been liken to Xenuria in the way I engage people in this game and how I come off and I've been banned from PL services just like him. Probably also because I've been told I have the aura of Digi. Which I don't necessarily think this is a bad thing as my rl background is similar to his. Anyways my point of views, the way I fairly assess and conduct myself in Eve and put people straight on blast as needed.. No matter who they are in game are similar to Xenuria. We need this for the CSM, very badly. I will have all my votes for Xenuria. I will champion him thru my alliance to look past his alliance affiliation and vote for him. Anyone who knows Xenuria knows that he doesn't sell out and there is no changing him, you simple love or hate and he's really hard to hate. If you do hate him I would say your a bandwagoning circle jerk mindless fool who can't think for themselves and allow others to influence your views on someone you never got to know. Get to know Xenuria, try to understand him, and see that he is what the playerbase deserves and needs.

Xenuria for CSM XI 2016
Follow me on Twitter @FR3SH0PShttps://twitter.com/FR3SH0PS
Vic Jefferson
ElitistOps
WE FORM V0LTA
#68 - 2016-01-09 01:33:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Vic Jefferson
Siobhan MacLeary wrote:
This is some fantastic, nuclear-grade salt right here.


Ah, Hole Squad. The last bastion of true goonyness. Literally the only reserve of those who live for the sting of battle, the rush of the dunk, and the sheepish sigh of the welp. Sadly, content is meted too you to as well. What a world this would be if you could shoot FCON and SMA, and their ilk? You are no better than who you can stomach being blue to.


Ted McManfist wrote:
I know you think "you've seen both sides" but you are really talking out of your rear end on this subject.


I have, and it left me feeling blue. Amazingly this was cured within hours of leaving, just not in me, but in all who have left your facade. You may call me crazy in an effort to obscure the points I have raised, yes, but you can't call every corp, alliance, and personality that has left the Imperium lately crazy too; they have all come to the same conclusion as I, and yes, very much so have seen both sides. People who have left the Imperium on their own accord are just plain offensive; just the idea that there could be a better play experience out side of 'Our People' is anathema to your propaganda.

Xenuria wrote:
Content isn't being rationed by goons, there isn't more of it up californi-way.


Being blue to the majority of null is rationing the content available to your members. Cloud Ring, one of the few places on the map with the proper people and location to see some the driving principles of Aegis Sov work, was so offensive to your leadership that they had no choice but to burn down the entire region. The idea that people could have Sov Space which fostered interaction among smaller entities was philosophically objectionable to their monolithic ideas of how space should be governed. The South and South East of the map hums the way the entire cluster should, but goons won't have that. They don't want content, they don't want anything to change; they simply want to cling to their empire. Lowsec thus becomes the place to find small quanta of content to placate the members, to give them purpose in a world where it has been taken away from them, and enemies to fight in a world where they have been removed.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?

Lauresh Thellere
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#69 - 2016-01-09 01:52:30 UTC
The Goons do have a vested interest in seeing the game thrive however they do often get to the point where they want CCP to do something and CCP doesn't want to (or doesn't want to yet) so the goons manipulate the feature until they make their point and CCP fix it.

Xenuria is the CFC "burn it to the ground" method as they've given up trying to get CCP to listen and are now trying to force CCP's hand.

Xenuria wrote:
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:
On page 4 and I'm not sure what you are about. You kind of just seem like a gimmick to be honest.


Do you have a question about my campaign?


Also Xenuria, you don't answer questions so there's no point asking if someone has any.
Xenuria
#70 - 2016-01-09 03:49:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Xenuria
Vic Jefferson wrote:
Siobhan MacLeary wrote:
This is some fantastic, nuclear-grade salt right here.


Ah, Hole Squad. The last bastion of true goonyness. Literally the only reserve of those who live for the sting of battle, the rush of the dunk, and the sheepish sigh of the welp. Sadly, content is meted too you to as well. What a world this would be if you could shoot FCON and SMA, and their ilk? You are no better than who you can stomach being blue to.


Ted McManfist wrote:
I know you think "you've seen both sides" but you are really talking out of your rear end on this subject.


I have, and it left me feeling blue. Amazingly this was cured within hours of leaving, just not in me, but in all who have left your facade. You may call me crazy in an effort to obscure the points I have raised, yes, but you can't call every corp, alliance, and personality that has left the Imperium lately crazy too; they have all come to the same conclusion as I, and yes, very much so have seen both sides. People who have left the Imperium on their own accord are just plain offensive; just the idea that there could be a better play experience out side of 'Our People' is anathema to your propaganda.

Xenuria wrote:
Content isn't being rationed by goons, there isn't more of it up californi-way.


Being blue to the majority of null is rationing the content available to your members. Cloud Ring, one of the few places on the map with the proper people and location to see some the driving principles of Aegis Sov work, was so offensive to your leadership that they had no choice but to burn down the entire region. The idea that people could have Sov Space which fostered interaction among smaller entities was philosophically objectionable to their monolithic ideas of how space should be governed. The South and South East of the map hums the way the entire cluster should, but goons won't have that. They don't want content, they don't want anything to change; they simply want to cling to their empire. Lowsec thus becomes the place to find small quanta of content to placate the members, to give them purpose in a world where it has been taken away from them, and enemies to fight in a world where they have been removed.



If I understand you correctly:

I am a bad CSM Candidate because I am in goons.
Goons are bad because they ration content.
You can tell they are rationing content because you know and have seen things~
You also have knowledge of how Sov Should~ Be and your way is the right way.

Did I miss anything?
Seraph IX Basarab
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#71 - 2016-01-09 04:18:24 UTC
...a good post?
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#72 - 2016-01-09 09:06:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Alphea Abbra
Xenuria wrote:
Or maybe you simply don't understand me, this process or what is at stake.
You mean that my understanding should be worse than yours? When your understanding of STV (The election process) is flawed at every level; you couldn't cite a single time you were endorsed by a major null-sec organisation (Or whether them placing you on their ballot should impact you negatively compared to not being on there at all); you lied about your voter base being 90% women and tried to back it up by something irrelevant; your ideas from your last CSM 11 thread were either meaningless or revealed to be incoherent; and your CSM reform idea has earlier contained abolishing elections for the CSM (But without making it CCP-picked, leaving it an open question how you think it should be...), because of voter fraud that you couldn't even point to any theoretically possible examples of (And of course, no empirical either).
This is before going back to your claims about when The Mittani misquotes you, or your old election video rants, but I think there's a goldmine for an EVE standup comedian who wants to parody you.

In essense, there was a reason why you weren't elected before. Not only because of your dishonesty in debating, or your idiocy when it comes to election mechanics or CSM stuff, and the irrelevance or absurdity of your platforms thus far. If you get in now, it's on the back of Goon votes, either because they vote for anyone from the CFC, or because Goon leadership places you on their official ballot, in which case they do so for a reason.
When your qualifications as a candidate are reduced to being a troll (Or honest idiot, it's still possible), it would be a weird reaon to place you on a ballot with other legitimate candidates. Why would anyone well-informed do so?
Most likely, to either limit other candidates' options to get elected or to make the CSM a laughingstock now that the whitepaper might be up for review.

In other words, we can actually identify possibilities as to why you might become an official Goon candidate, and neither are good for the game or the CSM. Paraphrasing from a former Goon CEO, you're not out to ruin the game, you're out to ruin our game.
Xenuria
#73 - 2016-01-09 12:14:17 UTC
Alphea Abbra wrote:
Xenuria wrote:
Or maybe you simply don't understand me, this process or what is at stake.
You mean that my understanding should be worse than yours? When your understanding of STV (The election process) is flawed at every level; you couldn't cite a single time you were endorsed by a major null-sec organisation (Or whether them placing you on their ballot should impact you negatively compared to not being on there at all); you lied about your voter base being 90% women and tried to back it up by something irrelevant; your ideas from your last CSM 11 thread were either meaningless or revealed to be incoherent; and your CSM reform idea has earlier contained abolishing elections for the CSM (But without making it CCP-picked, leaving it an open question how you think it should be...), because of voter fraud that you couldn't even point to any theoretically possible examples of (And of course, no empirical either).
This is before going back to your claims about when The Mittani misquotes you, or your old election video rants, but I think there's a goldmine for an EVE standup comedian who wants to parody you.

In essense, there was a reason why you weren't elected before. Not only because of your dishonesty in debating, or your idiocy when it comes to election mechanics or CSM stuff, and the irrelevance or absurdity of your platforms thus far. If you get in now, it's on the back of Goon votes, either because they vote for anyone from the CFC, or because Goon leadership places you on their official ballot, in which case they do so for a reason.
When your qualifications as a candidate are reduced to being a troll (Or honest idiot, it's still possible), it would be a weird reaon to place you on a ballot with other legitimate candidates. Why would anyone well-informed do so?
Most likely, to either limit other candidates' options to get elected or to make the CSM a laughingstock now that the whitepaper might be up for review.

In other words, we can actually identify possibilities as to why you might become an official Goon candidate, and neither are good for the game or the CSM. Paraphrasing from a former Goon CEO, you're not out to ruin the game, you're out to ruin our game.



Do you have any specific questions about my platform or do you just want to keep attacking me?
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#74 - 2016-01-09 12:47:06 UTC
Back when I did ask specific questions, you ignored them, so though it's a nice dodge, it doesn't really work for someone with your record.

But if you want to, you can take a look at this:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5615024#post5615024
and see if you're even able to answer those (The CSM-reform question is obviously in the context of that iteration of your candidacy).

I'm not really expecting any answer, since any answer at all requires your platform to have any substance. I've been following the CSM elections for a while now, and I'm fairly sure you're not one of the substantive candidates, not now and not back when your curtains were the best pro for your candidacy.
Seraph IX Basarab
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#75 - 2016-01-09 20:12:23 UTC
You ignored my questions too.
Detra Koraka
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#76 - 2016-01-10 12:25:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Detra Koraka
Xenuria wrote:
Bernie Nator wrote:
Xrend wrote:
Siobhan MacLeary wrote:
Bernie Nator wrote:

What are the current issues with wormholes?


Not the candidate, but as someone relatively knowledgeable wrt w-space, I'd say that w-space in general is actually in a pretty good spot, aside from a large Russian carebear coalition being in control of all of the best C6 space.

Most wormhole players, as far as I am aware, are content with the content available in w-space and would much rather CCP leave w-space well enough alone.

Also, in regards to the topic at hand, I support Xenuria's CSM campaign both for his desire to reform the CSM to be more effective a tool for CCP and players alike, as well as his desire for nicer shoes and some goddamn headgear in EVE.


Clearly you must have just resubbed to this game..... Russian Carebear Coalition??? Whatever. the only thing that even keeps Russians living in W-space is the TZ. No one likes shooting towers after DT.

The Only true statement you said in your post. "...Xenuria...[is an] effective tool...."

Honestly, If you want a slobbering idiot sitting on the CSM "representing" us.... Then a vote for Xenuria is the choice. I honestly can't wait for when Xenuria decides to make the rounds and does interviews. Pure gold.

Requoting so this gets in page 3, and I might get an answer from the candidate.

What are the current issues with wormhole space, Xenuria?


Please keep on topic. If you want to ask about wormholes than ask a candidate who is running on a wormhole platform.


On topic:
And what would your platform be? Would you be so kind to put it in, like, 5 (more or less) clear points!?
Xenuria
#77 - 2016-01-10 19:13:29 UTC
Detra Koraka wrote:


On topic:
And what would your platform be? Would you be so kind to put it in, like, 5 (more or less) clear points!?


Please see the first post of the thread also known as the OP or "Original Post".
Seraph IX Basarab
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#78 - 2016-01-10 19:33:12 UTC
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:
Xenuria wrote:
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:
List 3 ways you plan to reform the CSM.


I already did, please check the first page of the thread where I talk about white paper reform and related systems.



Yeah I did that. So your relevant parts:

"Reform in the context of the CSM would entail overhauling the white paper, installing safety measures, changing the language used when discussing certain topics, advocating and pushing for policy changes that encourage honesty but discourage superficial posturing. I suppose the problem is that when I say Reform I expect people to know what I mean without me having to list any number of things that are reformative.

For me it's sometimes difficult for me to explain what I mean without a specific context. Let me give you an example.


Q What are your reforms?
A Uhhh

Q How would you reform the CSM NDA?
A I would construct a spanning tree rubric with dates and subject tags that allowed for everybody under NDA to know explicitly what they are and are not allowed to discuss and with whom. "


1. Overhauling the white paper.

In what way?

2. Installing Safety Measures.

Such as?

3. Changing the language used when discussing topics.

Changing the language from what to what?

4. Advocating policies that encourage honesty but discourage superficial posturing.

"discourage superficial posturing"...could start with your posts.



Could you answer these questions?
Xenuria
#79 - 2016-01-10 19:36:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Xenuria
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:
Xenuria wrote:
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:
List 3 ways you plan to reform the CSM.


I already did, please check the first page of the thread where I talk about white paper reform and related systems.



Yeah I did that. So your relevant parts:

"Reform in the context of the CSM would entail overhauling the white paper, installing safety measures, changing the language used when discussing certain topics, advocating and pushing for policy changes that encourage honesty but discourage superficial posturing. I suppose the problem is that when I say Reform I expect people to know what I mean without me having to list any number of things that are reformative.

For me it's sometimes difficult for me to explain what I mean without a specific context. Let me give you an example.


Q What are your reforms?
A Uhhh

Q How would you reform the CSM NDA?
A I would construct a spanning tree rubric with dates and subject tags that allowed for everybody under NDA to know explicitly what they are and are not allowed to discuss and with whom. "


1. Overhauling the white paper.

In what way?

2. Installing Safety Measures.

Such as?

3. Changing the language used when discussing topics.

Changing the language from what to what?

4. Advocating policies that encourage honesty but discourage superficial posturing.

"discourage superficial posturing"...could start with your posts.



Could you answer these questions?


No I cannot. I am not on the CSM yet and thus not privy to the majority of information that would inform the specifics of my platform.
Detra Koraka
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#80 - 2016-01-10 19:45:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Detra Koraka
Xenuria wrote:
Detra Koraka wrote:


On topic:
And what would your platform be? Would you be so kind to put it in, like, 5 (more or less) clear points!?


Please see the first post of the thread also known as the OP or "Original Post".



Judging by your "OP" you're running solely to reform CSM, and those reforms are outlined by a Goonswarm lead diplomat, and not you.

Can you outline your "reforms" in 5 simple points, with clear and concise sentences? Please!?