EVE General Discussion

The Mittani has said basically in other words, what I think of the CSM voting system.

Here's a little Freakanomics. The reason the CSM are almost completely all from Nullsec is this: that is where the BIG ALLIANCES LIVE. They can only live there because of the high level of organisation involved, in order to successfully govern thousands of people and systems. Highsec requires no such grand scale organisation in order to survive. In other words, you're never going to find a collective voice in High-sec that will ever rival the collective voices you will find in Nullsec. Alliances with thousands of members will make damn sure they all vote for their selected candidate.

The same lack of a collecitve voice applies to low-sec too - where I come from. Our playstyle does not demand huge alliances to survive, so we can never muster the same number of votes for one person. I feel low-sec has been ignored for years, and I thought the ideas for it at the last CSM meeting were most unimaginative and frankly lame. I imagine people have similar feelings in high-sec.

So, I agree that NULLSEC is unfairly over-represented. How could this be fixed then? I think by introducing a much more advanced IN-GAME voting system. A system where candidates can put forward their policies on their own information page, and they are given the ability to advertise themselves somehow - something as simple as allowing them to post with BOLD and Coloured text in game might be enough.

TL:DR: Is the CSM unfairly over-represented by Nullsec? Yes. Is it their fault? No. Can something be done about it? Probably.

OP, interesting post, so I'd like to comment realistically.

1. The only "rage" I saw on these forums was when the failquitters failed to quit. Tears? Nope, haven't seen any. Drama llama much, OP?
2. Hate the Mittani? I don't know him, so I can't hate him. To be honest, his stand of "screw the player base, I listen to those that vote for me" is refreshingly honest. But as with all things, from my experience the Mittani has his own agenda, and doesn't say things he doesn't intend to. Like or hate, that's up to people who don't know him.
3. Since I couldn't care any less about the CSM, I really couldn't care less about them doing anything for or against high sec. Anyone looking at the CSM with an honest eye knows full well the CSM is virtually impotent: CCP will do what's best for CCP and its shareholders (I'm using that term lightly). If they want to eliminate high sec, they'll do it. If they want to make it a free-for-all, they'll do it. If they want to sell Golden Scorpions, they'll do it. And there really isn't a single thing the paying player base will be able to do about it. Waste all the time you want shooting at an object in-game that you know can't be harmed by your actions: it just makes you look like that spoiled kid in the corner stamping his foot because mommy didn't give him the cookie he demanded.

This is a game. Some of you take it way too seriously.

Yeah except it was CCP who brought up nerving ore/ice in WHs. Not Mittens.

They can't. I've asked several of the tinfoil hatters to list one thing CSM6 has done to hurt high sec and have never been provided with an answer.

I think you misunderstand why I'm running. It is not so much in oposition of you or the CSM 6. It is in fact because the relationship of the CSM with CPP has changed recently and there is a much greater sense that the CSM does much more to direct CCP's direction in Eve than it ever did before. So props for being part of that evolution.

I am running because if that is the case I want to see some folks in the next CSM that will work on getting CCP to put some attention in Eve going forward for aspects of the game I and I believe a large segment of Eve fill our space days with.

I also believe that the "backlash" many players feel about their perceived activities of the CSM 6 may be an opportunity for candidates that are focused on the areas of the game many believe the CSM 6activiely ignored or opposed.

For example, I bet I gain support everytime anyone in the CSM 6 or members of their constiuency uses the term "space barbiie" or claims the only thing folks in high sec want are more space pants. That drives the wedge between the CSM 6 and a considerable segment of the Eve population deeper every time.

I can't claim to have studied you but I know enough not to underestimate you or the CSM 6.

One final point that is often overlooked. I am not anti-goon in nature. My corp was even in the goon alliance back just before the goons launched for nul. The goons fill a place in the sandbox that help define the natiure of life in the Eve 'verse.

CSM 6 did NOTHING for highsec. It wasn't on their radar. THAT'S why it hurt highsec.

Another year wasted for the majority of Eve (in all it's guises) while the majority of changes suggested, for the betterment of 0.0, were implemented with gusto.

It's that kind of limited geographic CSM input combined with CCP's lack of understanding on where our game is heading that is the problem.

I will state categorically the CSM is not entirely to blame (contrary to popular belief) because empire could do a damn sight more to get off their collective asses to change the status quo.

Please good sir, tell me the changes made to improve 0.0.

There are 2 things i can come up with:

1) TiDi: This is a fundamental mechanic change that will benefit all of EvE because it lets CCP manage serverload better, they dont need to invest that much into new (better) server

2) supercap rebalance/logoff mechanics: those changes are very small in the effort department but have a huge positive influence


The biggest addet content this year was.... NEX and Incarna, thats where huge amounts of money went into, and I might say, it was more targeted at the Highsec crowd

What do you want for HighSec?

No, I am running specifically to get a chance to get CCP to focus some resources on the parts of Eve that are my and many other folks focus. The Voice of Reason support for mining, ambulation and a number of activities more commonly found dominating life in high sec will be why someone will be voting for someone in the Voice of Reason party.

And I am saying that the backlash against the CSM 6 makes it more likely someone not in the nulsec powerblock could be elected.

I was trying to say that the Voice of Reason party will be focusing on gaining support by support of issues usually associated with high sec and "carebears". We won't make this an attack on Mittens or the CSM 6. We will make this a fight to get someone on the CSM 7 that thinks mining is overdue for a refresh, that CCP needs to keep ambulation in their plans, or maybe that builders deserve an alternative to Technetium. These are the sorts of things we will campaign on.

Thanks for the opportunity for additional clarification.

I also recongnize I am just speaking for the party, the OP should also address some of these comments as well.

truly your ego is growing at such a vast rate that breathing may soon become hard

Nor should it be relevant to the subject matter really.

The various war efforts like Ice Interdiction and Hulkageddon that the Goons afford IG are just that, valid IG initiatives. Certain mechanics associated with the exercise might be at question, but you can hardly expect The Mittani or goons not to have a particular stance IG, they are allowed to play aswell you know.

The topic in question here is the focus to CSM responsibilites. However, I'm sure like the over Zealous Goons the players on the receiving end of these positions will want to destabalise any powerbase as a result (be naive not to expect that) but if meta concern's weren't an issue in the process the aspect of Trust could be afforded to it. But seriously "Trust" in EvE?

My personal concern is all this focus is actually detracting from the game and that the process of philanthropy (viewed as a weakness by some) where all players mutually benefit in this "sandbox", which can be accomodated for various interests, isnt being applied and may end up simply removing the enjoyment to it.

Not so impressed by some of the "clownish" behaviour at times either but accept it's part of the culture I'm "paying" for. Be nice to "see" some accountability and professionalism however as a result, even if it is just a voluntary process.