These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Ali Aras for CSM9

First post First post
Author
KuroVolt
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#41 - 2014-02-21 19:56:07 UTC
I feel Ali definitely pulled her weight in the CSM this last term and proved that she was more than up to the task. My vote last year did not go to waste.
And I dont feel she should have any problems getting re elected this year.


I do hope that this year she tries to stay away from the propaganda pieces that her CSM spotlight allows her to bring forth easier.

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.

corebloodbrothers
Volition Cult
The Volition Cult
#42 - 2014-02-21 20:23:11 UTC
Lets not mix a person s ingame behaviour with their ability to run a good csm. I am running for providence, which is obvious, and ali runs on her own merits. I dont mind if the csm excists of a collection of ingame scumbags and spying backstabbing bastards, as lomg as he or she protects my intrests in this game towards ccp too the best of their abilities. Ali stil has frends in provi and some will give her the votes if they feel she deserves them.

Stop dragging old cows out of the well, as we say in dutchland, and focus on the future,

Goodluck ali
Ali Aras
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2014-02-22 22:57:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Ali Aras
I have a few regrets about the 9UY engagements, actually. That said, if folks from Providence want to talk Provi politics, I'm happy to do so somewhere off-thread (podcasts? A separate thread, perhaps on a Provi forum?). I'll be sticking to CSM stuff from here on out in here, though. With that in mind...
entroncas wrote:

1 - what have you done for the NRDS comunity during the entire year? I would dare to say NOTHING!!

2 - About ESS: have you realized the ESS alongside with the syphon units are the most ******** features since encarna?

I've raised the alliance standings thing. It hasn't happened yet-- I'd love it if it would, and I'll bring it up again. However-- and this gets to a point raised in the post after yours-- the CSM can only persuade, not directly commit changes to the game's codebase. We win some, we lose some. The more incremental the change, the easier to win, so I'll be bringing this up again.

I've nudged a few noobs in the direction of Providence when it seemed like it'd fit their needs well. I've advocated for more and more interesting Live Events, which serves the RP part of that NRDS community. I spoke out on a feature, but unfortunately, can't say much more than that due to NDA.

Regarding the siphons and ESS, well. Siphons I've spoken out against repeatedly. I'm not sure if you've listened to Declarations of War, but we talked about it on Episode 61. Skip to the CSM section to hear just the siphons bit. In concept, they were supposed to *benefit* groups like Providence, by making it possible to screw with moons without going to all the trouble of knocking towers over. In practice, they're a giant kick in the balls to anyone's logistics team, promote blue-on-blue violence, and are challenging to police. Remember when I said you win some, you lose some? ;-) Multiple CSM members have kept on nagging about these.

The ESS, meanwhile, we won some on. It was released to bad community feedback, I collected and streamlined a lot of the feedback, and the structure was changed. I'm actually somewhat surprised you're not a fan-- SOUND would have used these every day in Provi. They're best when you're in an active region with viable defense gangs (like Provi...), and they provide benefit to everyone in the system, regardless of alliance (meaning there's no weirdness with neuts or blues ratting in your space as well). Assuming you can loot them, they're a bonus to ratting income as well. Hostiles can't really drop one on you, because you can just shoot it as soon as they leave. Can you say more about what you don't like about them?

Loscos Cosquiscador wrote:
I commend the work you've done and you'll definately be a consideration on my ballot. If you were to secure a consecutive seat on the csm would there be anything you would improve upon from your time spent this year? Rather is there anything you've though you could do better and will do better going forward into csm 9?

This is a really, really, really excellent question, thank you for asking it.

I didn’t explicitly run on a communication platform last year, but communication is one of the things I was known for. A part of that, while I wasn’t the one who did the lifting, was csm8.org. The multiblog is really useful, but the site could be better. This year, I’m partly running on an organizational platform, and I’d like to make something like that useful for CSM 9. A big improvement would be a calendar, multi-twitter feed (and maybe an outgoing twitter feed that autoposts blogs or something?), but those take some time and effort and gentle loving prods of other CSM members.

Also, I could be better at answering my damn eve-mail. Sorry :(

In general, I think as with most things, CSM is a skill, and it’s one I’ve gotten better at over time. I’m more effective now than I was nine months ago, partly because now I know how to ask the right questions in the right kind of way, both of other players and of CCP. I’ve become practiced in the art of NDA-fu, and I’ve seen more issues that arise over time. Each time something new comes up, I learn from it. So, next year, I'd like to keep getting better at the stuff I'm already doing-- representing players to CCP, and following up on important issues.

aaaaand two part post, I'm out of words...

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

Ali Aras
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2014-02-22 22:58:31 UTC
Black Canary Jnr wrote:

Although you don't have a particular platform this year i'd like to hear your views on the state of NRDS, and how you would improve it/ make it more viable, since entroncas made a pretty rash posting and it'd be a shame if you didn't address it as someone who has been NRDS and is now NBIS/ Merc.

Well, to start off with, there are several NRDS-specific pain points. One, as I already mentioned, is alliance standings. They’re limited, and when you have to set a lot of reds, you run out fast. Another is the sovholding restriction on PI-- I can’t put PI down on a planet in sovnull if I don’t own the system. That makes NRDS sovnull harder and it lowers the income sovholders can achieve. I’m working on both of those.

Overall, though-- NRDS is, as Rovern (iirc) once put it, “EVE on hardmode”. It requires trusting your neighbors, it opens you up to more risk than NBSI does, and it allows those who might eventually mean you harm to take advantage of your space and goodwill. Right now, the only clear advantage of NRDS is, essentially, friendliness. It leads to a more vibrant space, but neither of those is something that large entities need someone to provide for them. In order for NRDS to exist, much less thrive, either the big meta must evolve a use for it or the game must have enough room for smaller entities to play “suboptimally”. The latter is something which would be good for the game overall. Does that about answer your question?

PS: I'm hoping the winter summit minutes will be out before the election itself ;-) They've been submitted by the CSM and are in CCP review process, and I'm in contact with CCP Dolan about how that's going. And yes, I'm nagging more this go 'round.

Thanks to Core, KuroVolt, Peto Kabukicho, Mang, Loscos Cosquiscador, and Black Canary for the kind words :)

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

Ransu Asanari
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#45 - 2014-02-24 10:19:12 UTC
Ali, speaking of communication, did the discussion on missiles rebalance get brought up, as asked in the November Town Hall? I just want to make sure there's some acknowledgement of the issue being raised to CCP, as I haven't seen anything in the Jita Park thread to know if the loop has been closed on the dicsussion.

Frankly, I was fairly frustrated at my attempt to raise an issue to the CSM to discuss solutions. The responses on thread were fairly unhelpful, and I never got responses from EVE Mail. I appreciated the input being brought via the Town Hall, and blog posts, but how do you think you can help make this process better?
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#46 - 2014-02-25 03:31:27 UTC
If CCP asked you for three things that would improve the tutorials (I know, only three!), what would you tell them?

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Ali Aras
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2014-02-26 05:47:33 UTC
Ransu Asanari wrote:
Ali, speaking of communication, did the discussion on missiles rebalance get brought up, as asked in the November Town Hall? I just want to make sure there's some acknowledgement of the issue being raised to CCP, as I haven't seen anything in the Jita Park thread to know if the loop has been closed on the dicsussion.

Frankly, I was fairly frustrated at my attempt to raise an issue to the CSM to discuss solutions. The responses on thread were fairly unhelpful, and I never got responses from EVE Mail. I appreciated the input being brought via the Town Hall, and blog posts, but how do you think you can help make this process better?

I've talked about it a bit with them, but...I'm not really sure how to "bring something back" :-/ It's hard given the NDA; I know that's a common refrain among CSMs, but it's also *true*. "Can you post that to the thread?" works well when there's a clear answer to a player question; when there's not, it's harder.

I have unironically considered a ticketing system; I know we were playing with Jira at one point but I'm not sure if that's the best option. I already have "respond better to evemail" as a to-do (and to my credit, knocked one right off earlier this week! Better than forum posts!) but other than "be better at posting/mailing/tweeting/responding in-kind to issues brought up", I'm less sure what to do. Is it just acknowledgement of "this has been brought up" that you're looking for, or are you looking for an actual answer ("this has been brought up, and CCP is working on/ignoring/doesn't care about this")?

Dersen Lowery wrote:
If CCP asked you for three things that would improve the tutorials (I know, only three!), what would you tell them?

Haha, oh my. I'm going to interpret your question a little more broadly as the "new player experience" rather than the tutorials themselves, because it all works together and tutorial missions are a sort of necessary evil. If possible, I'd like to minimize them as much as is reasonable.

For an actual useful mission, though, I'd like something that *unexpectedly* blows the new player up. Get them in over their heads, get them tackled by scramming rats, whatever, then reimburse the loss with the NPCs. There was a "throw the new player right into the depths" idea that I really liked; you could do it that way or just alter the current missions that get a player blown up. Either way, a newbie shouldn't leave the tutorial zone without having heard their hull alarm. This acclimates them to loss in EVE and most importantly, it highlights the primary difference between EVE and other MMOs: In EVE, *all* equipment is consumable/disposable.

The second would be to add some signposting towards player corporations-- perhaps a means of "graduating" from your noobcorp into an NPC corp (or real corp)! Basically, an NPC informs you that "it's time" ~1 month in to your life as a noob, and invites you to investigate player corp offerings. They walk you through the corp recruiting interface, and also allow you to graduate to the facwar militia or your NPC older-corp (the one you go to if you go noobcorp -> player corp -> quit player corp). Rookie help chat can be folded into newbie corp corp chat, meaning you already have a sense that "this is where you talk for community".

The third would be to improve the dang PvP skills intro. It sucks right now. I would like newbies to know about d-scan and ship fitting, from somewhere better than the ship fitting guide. You could even introduce this by having them build several fits over the course of a mission-series, with mods and skills coming along the way instead of a random assortment of "here's a web. here's a shield booster. here's a railgun, which should go well with your blaster you already have." And, you know, you could do this with UI elements too...but there's a fourth thing, and I'm out of bullet points :P

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

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#48 - 2014-02-26 11:29:42 UTC
Ali Aras wrote:

Loscos Cosquiscador wrote:
I commend the work you've done and you'll definately be a consideration on my ballot. If you were to secure a consecutive seat on the csm would there be anything you would improve upon from your time spent this year? Rather is there anything you've though you could do better and will do better going forward into csm 9?

This is a really, really, really excellent question, thank you for asking it.

I didn’t explicitly run on a communication platform last year, but communication is one of the things I was known for. A part of that, while I wasn’t the one who did the lifting, was csm8.org. The multiblog is really useful, but the site could be better. This year, I’m partly running on an organizational platform, and I’d like to make something like that useful for CSM 9. A big improvement would be a calendar, multi-twitter feed (and maybe an outgoing twitter feed that autoposts blogs or something?), but those take some time and effort and gentle loving prods of other CSM members.

Also, I could be better at answering my damn eve-mail. Sorry :(

In general, I think as with most things, CSM is a skill, and it’s one I’ve gotten better at over time. I’m more effective now than I was nine months ago, partly because now I know how to ask the right questions in the right kind of way, both of other players and of CCP. I’ve become practiced in the art of NDA-fu, and I’ve seen more issues that arise over time. Each time something new comes up, I learn from it. So, next year, I'd like to keep getting better at the stuff I'm already doing-- representing players to CCP, and following up on important issues.

aaaaand two part post, I'm out of words...


What Ali should also have mentioned, but didn't because she's too modest, is that she will also be more effective next year because she has earned considerable respect from her colleagues and CCP.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Crazey Monkey
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2014-02-26 11:51:13 UTC
Do you think having two CSM representatives from one alliance might cause any problems on the CSM? Even though you are both awesome people.
I don't believe this has been done in the past quite often.
Ali Aras
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2014-02-26 14:59:00 UTC
Shouldn't be a problem at all. Chitsa joined SSC partway through CSM 8's term and it was fine, others have doubled up before. We each bring different things to the table, and that's all that matters.

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

Ransu Asanari
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#51 - 2014-02-27 03:51:42 UTC
Ali Aras wrote:
Is it just acknowledgement of "this has been brought up" that you're looking for, or are you looking for an actual answer ("this has been brought up, and CCP is working on/ignoring/doesn't care about this")?
It was really just an acknowledgement or response that the issue had been picked up and brought up with CCP for discussion. Knowing whether ithe proposal needs more information/discussion, or is being dismissed out of hand would be nice, but I can understand that might be restricted by NDA.

Thanks for the response!
Tyrant Scorn
#52 - 2014-03-01 07:34:15 UTC
Hello everyone,

You can find the interview I had with Ali Aras at the following link:

Mp3 Download Link:
www.legacyofacapsuleer.com/mp3/CSM9_interview_05_Ali_Aras.mp3

Watch It On YouTube At:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvqMxAy4TSY

Hope you guys enjoy the interview and I hope you get to know Ali Aras a bit better.

Greetz & thanks,

Tyrant Scorn
Alekseyev Karrde
Capitalist Army
Streamfleet
#53 - 2014-03-01 08:20:03 UTC
Crazey Monkey wrote:
Do you think having two CSM representatives from one alliance might cause any problems on the CSM? Even though you are both awesome people.
I don't believe this has been done in the past quite often.

One of the times it did happen I can personally speak to was CSM4, where Zastrow and Mrs Trzzbk both represented Goonswarm. Despite their membership in the same corp, they each brought a unique set of skills and perspective to discussions. They both contributed to a really successful CCP/CSM summit (back in the day when CSM only got one of those per term).

Having known Psianh for quite a while and worked closely with Ali on Declarations of War podcast since her election, I can say with confidence they're both extremely solid and passionate players. They have some different interests/skills as well as some shared ones. Ali has really proven herself to be a workhorse on the council and I think Psianh would follow in that tradition to be an excellent addition to the team that compliments Ali and carries forward the fantastic work CSM8 has done in general.

Alek the Kidnapper, Hero of the CSM

Arafelis Keikira
Perkone
Caldari State
#54 - 2014-03-04 09:35:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Arafelis Keikira
There's a persistent dichotomy between asymmetrical warfare and cheap anarchy; attacking and dismantling an institution isn't accomplished by throwing bricks through the windows of its neighbors and subsidiaries, regardless of the visceral satisfaction achieved.

We were given bricks in the form of the Siphon units. I rather like these in concept (I haven't gotten around to playing much with them -- this pesky neutrality thing inhibits me against non WTs and our current target isn't terribly conventional themselves) but then, I have no particular logistical needs.

You expressed displeasure with them, and now I'm asking a question that's loaded like a poorly-maintained gun. All this verbal varnish is just to hide the boom.

Are the opportunities for more radical asymmetric warfare something you intend to advocate for in the next year, given the opportunity?
corbexx
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#55 - 2014-03-04 19:23:50 UTC
Crazey Monkey wrote:
Do you think having two CSM representatives from one alliance might cause any problems on the CSM? Even though you are both awesome people.
I don't believe this has been done in the past quite often.


you do reaslise we have 2 csm from the same wh corp (not allaince) on csm at the moment maybe you should ask them.

on to ali a question for you.

In wh space when some one gets invaded (evicted) normally its fight or die if the defending group loses they basically lose everything in that wh.

Null sec has just started "dead zoning" do you think it would be just easier to allow stations to be destroyable?
Ali Aras
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2014-03-05 04:55:27 UTC
Arafelis Keikira wrote:
There's a persistent dichotomy between asymmetrical warfare and cheap anarchy; attacking and dismantling an institution isn't accomplished by throwing bricks through the windows of its neighbors and subsidiaries, regardless of the visceral satisfaction achieved.

We were given bricks in the form of the Siphon units. I rather like these in concept (I haven't gotten around to playing much with them -- this pesky neutrality thing inhibits me against non WTs and our current target isn't terribly conventional themselves) but then, I have no particular logistical needs.

You expressed displeasure with them, and now I'm asking a question that's loaded like a poorly-maintained gun. All this verbal varnish is just to hide the boom.

Are the opportunities for more radical asymmetric warfare something you intend to advocate for in the next year, given the opportunity?

So, lemme try breaking this down into two questions: 1) what did I not like about the siphons? and 2) how do I feel about asymmetric warfare?

Regarding siphons, I don't like them because there's absolutely no way for the pos owner to not get hurt, or to share the work of checking and cleaning their pos. The siphon destroys goo as soon as it goes down, so *even if* the owner takes the moongoo and kills the siphon, they'll have taken a loss-- even if the siphon-owner never even intended to return! As for sharing the work, the corp bookmark limit is pretty low (hard to find the pos) and once you find a siphoned pos, there's absolutely no way to be a good samaritan and return the goo! You'd have to contract it in a station, which means you have to know exactly who to contract to and they have to log their POS alt in and and and and and.

They're an example of what I call "kick-in-the-balls" gameplay, which is generally not something I support. The theft is great, the difficulty in countering them and impossibility of fully protecting yourself-- no matter what you do to your pos setup or how often you log in-- is frustrating.

So, asymmetric gameplay in general. This is, after the form of your question, going to be a bit scattershot. I like asymmetric gameplay that's implemented well, and I plan to push for more of it. After all, it's the stuff that keeps me employed and it's an easy way to make small-gang content *matter*.

In general, if someone's built up their space (people should be able to build up their space), those improvements should be disruptable by a band of roamers. I like things in the genre of the ESS: you put it up, it provides you with a boon, but there's a way to interfere with that boon that's more active than just "cloak and go afk". I remain a fan of activity sov; space which is not lived-in (and asymmetric warfare such as black ops can quickly make a space not lived in) should be held only lightly and easily taken.

Tactics, intel, and terrain should allow a prepared and dedicated enemy to overcome an enemy with greater numbers. Some kinds of tactics/terrain should only work for a smaller fleet.

It's also important when thinking about this to keep in mind scaling. Asymmetric gameplay can scale very, very poorly. Some tactics or mechanics which are thought of as "asymmetric gameplay" are absolutely brutal when adopted by the blob. It's sort of a variant of Malcanis's law-- you get something meant to help newbies, it helps the vets more. In this case, you get something meant to help the little guy, it makes the big bloc 100x more effective. Oops.

We haven't seen the effect of a region carpeted with punitive siphons-- siphons to which the owner does not ever intend to return-- yet I can imagine it being massively demoralizing and powerful in a game where sov wars are won by keeping your enemy from logging on. A band of 250 Celestises can disable an entire enemy fleet. 400 slowcats will beat 300 slowcats; bringing more titans and supers has no counter other than "be somewhere titans and supers can't be".

So yes, I plan to push for more asymmetric gameplay, but there are instances where I'd oppose it as well, mostly where it fails the scaling test.

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

Arafelis Keikira
Perkone
Caldari State
#57 - 2014-03-05 12:04:20 UTC
Ali Aras wrote:
We haven't seen the effect of a region carpeted with punitive siphons-- siphons to which the owner does not ever intend to return-- yet I can imagine it being massively demoralizing and powerful in a game where sov wars are won by keeping your enemy from logging on. A band of 250 Celestises can disable an entire enemy fleet. 400 slowcats will beat 300 slowcats; bringing more titans and supers has no counter other than "be somewhere titans and supers can't be".

So yes, I plan to push for more asymmetric gameplay, but there are instances where I'd oppose it as well, mostly where it fails the scaling test.


I -- and the Chinese philosopher Mozi, who you should really look up sometime -- agree. The only outcome of siphoncarpeting is scorched earth; terrain unsuitable for anyone to live. I do disagree that you can't stop this, but the means of 90% prevention (constant patrolling system security) is more readily available to larger groups than smaller ones. (And as with all economic factors, once you've reached the point of diminishing returns on prevention, you just build the probable losses into your budget. Which again favors giants and nihilists.)

Anyway, you have my vote. Thanks for taking the time to dissect that question.
StupidGenius Charante
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2014-03-05 20:25:15 UTC
This is shamelessly a CopyPasta from my post on Mike Azariah's thread, but the intent is to get feedback from Returning CSM members.

What do you see as the biggest failing of CSM8?
What do you see as the biggest failing of CCP over the last year?
What do you think YOU personally, could have done better in CSM8?
What advice do you have for the perspective CSM9 candidates?
What do you see as the largest issue facing CSM9?
Jayne Fillon
#59 - 2014-03-06 20:20:15 UTC
Ali, since I've asked other members of the CSM this same question, how would you go on about introducing more small gang into 0.0 warfare?

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.

Ali Aras
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2014-03-07 05:37:35 UTC
StupidGenius Charante wrote:
This is shamelessly a CopyPasta from my post on Mike Azariah's thread, but the intent is to get feedback from Returning CSM members.

What do you see as the biggest failing of CSM8?
What do you see as the biggest failing of CCP over the last year?
What do you think YOU personally, could have done better in CSM8?
What advice do you have for the perspective CSM9 candidates?
What do you see as the largest issue facing CSM9?

Failing: Collectively, probably the speed/visibility of our response on the Somer controversy? We responded quickly in private, and several CSMs were publicly posting things about it, but there was less of a Unified Statement Thing the way there was with the TOS response.

Biggest failing of CCP was absolutely not sending the TOS and Somer things by us first. In fairness, they fixed that, and we've since reviewed and provided feedback on several things that would have had community reactions. Unfortunately, "long threads prevented" isn't an easily visible metric, but there's a few things in particular that've improved.

I said this on Crossing Zebras, but I wish I'd better anticipated the ESS criticism. I responded well and effectively, but, I've been a nullsec ratter and those criticisms did make sense.

Advice for CSM candidates: focus on your philosophy more than your specific ideas; use ideas as an example of philosophy. You won't be able to get everyone a pony, you will be providing input on a lot of different things you'd never even imagined.

Biggest issue: I'd really, really like to get communication to where a peacetime CSM is as visible as a conflict-oriented one as CSM 6. CSM 8 did some good stuff with the CSM/CCP relationship and took CSM 7's ball and ran with it; CSM 9 could improve even more on the public communication front. Issues-wise, it's gonna be the balance between fixes and new features.

Jayne I'll get to you tomorrow, I got backed up on doing actual CSM stuff instead of campaigning #incumbentproblems

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