These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Sion Kumitomo: CSM X

First post
Author
Sion Kumitomo
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1 - 2014-11-23 17:54:32 UTC
Hi. I’m running for CSM again.

As I said last year, I’m not running on a platform, I’m running on a skillset. I’m still a goon. My experience and space resume remains largely the same, albeit a year more of it. The only difference between this year and last is that I’d add to it my time as CSM. But what a difference a year makes.

If you’ve read the minutes, you’ll know that I have a wide variety of opinions on a wide variety of subjects. I’ve written on TMC about the intersection of mechanics, player motivation, and psychology. I’ve done some investigative journalism, and I’ve also been party to public criticism directed at CCP. I’m still committed to the idea that EVE is about relationships. At this point, anyone voting for me should know what they’re getting. In the immortal words of Popeye, “I yam what I yam and tha's all what I yam.”

In my campaign thread last year, I expressed hope that CCP had a plan for 0.0 and an understanding of how nullsec works. While there are a couple singular exceptions, CCP lacks both a plan and understanding. This is why I’m running again. I’m quite sure they’re all well intentioned, but nullsec is a unique and complicated ecosystem. I understand it far better than they do, and I’d rather they not introduce cane toads.

When I started my term last year, I had certain expectations of how the CSM worked and what it meant. For a hardened space politician, I was unfortunately naïve. That naïveté is gone. After hearing the CSM called a “PR tool” by one of CCP’s public relations people, I know where the CSM stands. After many of the disparaging comments made to me directly, I know where I stand. The new release cycle makes it harder than ever for the CSM to have input and be heard. The institution requires strong, professional voices from people with the confidence to, if necessary, fight. Because that’s what it takes, not sycophantic CCP apologists, not rabid anti-CCP detractors. It’s a tough balance to strike, and the people you vote in dictate the effectiveness of the institution itself. Vote wisely.

I’m a straight shooter. You might not always like what I say. CCP certainly doesn’t. But you’ll always know what I think, and why.

You’re quite welcome to mail me about various matters, but if you have any nuanced platform questions, please drop them here in thread as I’m not going to respond to EVE-mails asking for multi-paragraph explanations. It’s nothing personal, I simply don’t have the time to write a thousand mini-essays. I can also be reached on twitter @siggonK.

On twitter @siggonK

Lorelei Ierendi
We Care A Lot
#2 - 2014-11-23 18:02:45 UTC
Hi! Thank you for running again!

Two questions:

1) I know that the goons are a large group, and take care of their own. Do you have any opinions about the development of the New Player Experience?

2) I read some posts on Themittani.com, and some other places... and the thought that CCP might, just might ban me for no apparent reason... not tell me what that reason is... and be "wrong"... keeps me awake sometimes at night (especially when I have to get my credit card out for something...). What can we do to better this situation??

http://hisec-carebear.blogspot.de/

Jadecougar
Bear Bones Brigade
#3 - 2014-11-23 19:39:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Jadecougar
I wholeheartedly support the re-run of Sion to CSM X.

There are few in the game with the level of calmness, experience, and greater understanding of the game as a whole. Do not let the age old Grr Goons sentiments cloud the facts of him being a solid and reliable member that will fight for the best interests of the game as a whole. Sion is honed in on the key topics right now and with EVE in such a critical phase of developments right now, we all will want someone in the team that knows what they are talking about, has the years of experience, and has access to data through the wealth of resources within his alliance to ensure CCP are full aware of their decisions. For what it's worth, there are also few people in this game that I value on a personal level as much as Sion. He may be on CSM but he remains very much down to earth and approachable, unlike (some) other CSMs present and past

Vote for Sion Kumitomo
Bam Stroker
Van Diemen's Demise
Northern Coalition.
#4 - 2014-11-24 09:36:54 UTC
Glad to see that you're running again, Sion. I commend you to the players of New Eden as someone I think should certainly be returned to the CSM.

EVE Down Under - a community for players in the AUTZ

In-game channel: evedownunder // Twitter: @evedownunder

https://www.facebook.com/evedownunder

Sion Kumitomo
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#5 - 2014-11-24 17:28:14 UTC
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:
Hi! Thank you for running again!

Two questions:

1) I know that the goons are a large group, and take care of their own. Do you have any opinions about the development of the New Player Experience?

2) I read some posts on Themittani.com, and some other places... and the thought that CCP might, just might ban me for no apparent reason... not tell me what that reason is... and be "wrong"... keeps me awake sometimes at night (especially when I have to get my credit card out for something...). What can we do to better this situation??


1. Goonswarm has a long history of bringing in newbees and in general being a newbee friendly organization. What we've found largely mirrors what CCP's statistics indicate: people who get involved in the social component of the game stick around longer. So while there are mechanical aspects that can be changed to flatten EVE's vertical learning curve, the biggest single factor is getting new players involved in the community. My focus is therefore on ways to get players the tools to help make that transition from npc corp to player corp as smooth and intuitive as possible.

2. I've yet to encounter a case where someone was arbitrarily banned for no reason whatsoever. And if you ask, everyone who is ever banned will say that they're innocent. That doesn't mean that CCP doesn't make mistakes and that there isn't room for improvement. But if it legitimately keeps you up at night, go find some truly innocent people and make a case study out of it, push loudly and publicly for reform. Offer some practical solutions, don't just toss rocks or concern troll.

Jadecougar wrote:
I wholeheartedly support the re-run of Sion to CSM X.

There are few in the game with the level of calmness, experience, and greater understanding of the game as a whole. Do not let the age old Grr Goons sentiments cloud the facts of him being a solid and reliable member that will fight for the best interests of the game as a whole. Sion is honed in on the key topics right now and with EVE in such a critical phase of developments right now, we all will want someone in the team that knows what they are talking about, has the years of experience, and has access to data through the wealth of resources within his alliance to ensure CCP are full aware of their decisions. For what it's worth, there are also few people in this game that I value on a personal level as much as Sion. He may be on CSM but he remains very much down to earth and approachable, unlike (some) other CSMs present and past

Vote for Sion Kumitomo


Thanks for the endorsement dude, it's great to see you back in game too.

Bam Stroker wrote:
Glad to see that you're running again, Sion. I commend you to the players of New Eden as someone I think should certainly be returned to the CSM.


Hey Bam, thanks for the kind words. I'm still hoping you're kicking around that conversation you had with me and others in Vegas, just sayin'.




On twitter @siggonK

Lorelei Ierendi
We Care A Lot
#6 - 2014-11-25 19:36:25 UTC
Sion Kumitomo wrote:

2. I've yet to encounter a case where someone was arbitrarily banned for no reason whatsoever. And if you ask, everyone who is ever banned will say that they're innocent. That doesn't mean that CCP doesn't make mistakes and that there isn't room for improvement. But if it legitimately keeps you up at night, go find some truly innocent people and make a case study out of it, push loudly and publicly for reform. Offer some practical solutions, don't just toss rocks or concern troll.


Well there is concrete information out there, that banned players have not been informed by CCP why they have (in the concrete case) been banned.

Whilst I am sure that the players that were banned must have done something "ban worthy", not informing them why their account was banned (as in concretely for what) seems kind of weak. A practical solution would be for CCP to say "you have been permabanned for being associated with Erotica 1s bonus room".

I am mostly disturbed that CCP does not always offer a reason, and therefore the chance of an "appeal".

I guess DJFunkyBacons grey area left me all nervous.

http://hisec-carebear.blogspot.de/

corbexx
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#7 - 2014-11-27 01:27:38 UTC
Sion really knows his stuff, its as simple as that, been a great asset to CSM. TBH he wont need help to get on, but he more than justifies his position.
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2014-11-29 16:25:52 UTC
Sion Kumitomo, I'd like to pose the same question to you that I posed to Corbexx. You were in the meeting where CCP proposed the removal of high sec awoxing, and barely spoke other than to suggest that suicide ganking is a decent replacement for it. Is this actually your opinion, and could you elaborate on whether you support this change?

Founder of Violet Squadron, a small gang NPSI community! Mail me for more information.

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!

Sion Kumitomo
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#9 - 2014-12-01 02:14:28 UTC
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:
Sion Kumitomo, I'd like to pose the same question to you that I posed to Corbexx. You were in the meeting where CCP proposed the removal of high sec awoxing, and barely spoke other than to suggest that suicide ganking is a decent replacement for it. Is this actually your opinion, and could you elaborate on whether you support this change?


I was the one who proposed the removal of "highsec awoxing," not CCP.

On twitter @siggonK

Lanctharus Onzo
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#10 - 2014-12-02 04:58:17 UTC
Good to hear that you have decided to run again.

As you are aware we at the Cap Stable Podcast interviewed you during your run for CSM9 and we wish to do the same this year for CSM10.

Here is our announcement: http://capstable.net/2014/12/01/council-of-stellar-management-x-call-for-candidate-interviews/

As we stated in the announcement, you can contact us to schedule your one on one interview via any of the following methods:

Email: podcast@capstable.net
Twitter: @CapStable
Or via our contact form

We look forward to speaking to you about your particular skill set and expertise in EVE Online and we hope you success in your candidacy.

Sincerely,

Lanctharus Onzo
Co-host & Writer of the Cap Stable Podcast
Military Director, Alea Iacta Est Universal

Executive Editor, CSM Watch || Writer, Co-host of the Cap Stable Podcast || Twitter: @Lanctharus

Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
#11 - 2014-12-02 16:36:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Sion Kumitomo wrote:
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:
Sion Kumitomo, I'd like to pose the same question to you that I posed to Corbexx. You were in the meeting where CCP proposed the removal of high sec awoxing, and barely spoke other than to suggest that suicide ganking is a decent replacement for it. Is this actually your opinion, and could you elaborate on whether you support this change?


I was the one who proposed the removal of "highsec awoxing," not CCP.


Can you elaborate on your reasons for this proposal?

It seems to me that there are no advantages to this change in game mechanics, only complications. "True" newbies aren't affected by awoxing (they don't even know what it is nor have any assets of note to lose), so they are unlikely to change their behaviour. It only serves to protect highsec corporations by removing one of the few remaining risks to them. Good highsec corps interested in training new players already have systems (background checks, dedicated training corps, etc.) to protect themselves, so all this does is encourage lazy and clueless CEOs to spam invites at new players risk-free, and may result in more new players ending up in small, low-quality corps run by equally clueless players. This will make their first Eve experience more frustrating than if they were recruited into a corp that demonstrated an understanding of game mechanics demanded to protect itself from awoxers, who could teach them about the game and support them properly.

More practically, removing awoxing also makes highsec corp training and intra-corp events more difficult, and removes one of the few remaining tools that can drive conflict between highsec corporations.

In my view, corporations should be meaningful and have value so players want to defend them - they should not be glorified chat channels. With that value should come the responsibility of defending those corporations from threats both external (wardecs) and from within (awoxing). Do you agree that a better solution might be to create a lower-tier corp (that is a glorified chat channel), that is immune to wardecs and awoxing, but that does not get the current benefits (taxes, POSes, etc.) of a player corp? New players and risk-adverse carebears can play there, while players who want the increased rewards and challenges of running a full player corp can still do so.

In short, what do you think a player corporation should be in Eve?
Sion Kumitomo
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#12 - 2014-12-03 06:04:41 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Sion Kumitomo wrote:
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:
Sion Kumitomo, I'd like to pose the same question to you that I posed to Corbexx. You were in the meeting where CCP proposed the removal of high sec awoxing, and barely spoke other than to suggest that suicide ganking is a decent replacement for it. Is this actually your opinion, and could you elaborate on whether you support this change?


I was the one who proposed the removal of "highsec awoxing," not CCP.


Can you elaborate on your reasons for this proposal?

In short, what do you think a player corporation should be in Eve?


Counter-intuitive mechanics are stupid. People who push counter-intuitive mechanics to support their favored playstyle at the expense of good sense are shortsighted. And I continue to cringe at hisec's appropriation of the term 'Awoxing,' as it is a Noble and Right pursuit born in 0.0.

A player corporation is whatever the players involved make of it. Some corps choose to engage in riskless ganking that abuses obtuse game mechanics, that's what does it for them. Some would rather mine all day. Some would rather focus on tournaments. There's no one right way to play, as I covered extensively in my article on TMC, linked in the OP.

On twitter @siggonK

Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
#13 - 2014-12-03 08:43:00 UTC
Sion Kumitomo wrote:
Counter-intuitive mechanics are stupid. People who push counter-intuitive mechanics to support their favored playstyle at the expense of good sense are shortsighted. And I continue to cringe at hisec's appropriation of the term 'Awoxing,' as it is a Noble and Right pursuit born in 0.0.

A player corporation is whatever the players involved make of it. Some corps choose to engage in riskless ganking that abuses obtuse game mechanics, that's what does it for them. Some would rather mine all day. Some would rather focus on tournaments. There's no one right way to play, as I covered extensively in my article on TMC, linked in the OP.

I don't see how intra-corp aggression mechanics are any more counter-intuitive than the rest of the game mechanics, especially in highsec. It may have been implemented as a byproduct of the coding which allowed corp-on-corp interactions, but has grown to serve a very real role in the training and culture (intracorp sparring) of many highsec corps. Removing it will be a headache, especially for larger highsec entities who use it routinely.

What is next, removing wardecs because it is "unintuitive" that when you join a new corporation (that is in a war) you might become a war target to someone else? Or remove suicide ganking because it is "unintuitive" that CONCORD may not be able to save you all the time?

These risks are what make the game interesting to play (otherwise everyone will just fit max yield/cargo), and are honestly the only significant non-consensual risks to players in highsec (although to be clear, dying unexpectedly to a corpmate is probably at least an order of magnitude less frequent than the other two). I agree there is no "right way" to play, but there is a "right way" to design a sandbox game - and that is to implement at least some measure of risk vs. reward balance across all activities.

If you want a 100% safe space for new players then just make one (as part of a NPE revamp?) with the appropriate levels of rewards, but highsec is suppose to be a place with risk as CCP Falcon has recently reminded us.

Best of luck on your CSM campaign.

Sion Kumitomo
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#14 - 2014-12-03 22:35:54 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
I don't see how intra-corp aggression mechanics are any more counter-intuitive than the rest of the game mechanics, especially in highsec. It may have been implemented as a byproduct of the coding which allowed corp-on-corp interactions, but has grown to serve a very real role in the training and culture (intracorp sparring) of many highsec corps. Removing it will be a headache, especially for larger highsec entities who use it routinely.

What is next, removing wardecs because it is "unintuitive" that when you join a new corporation (that is in a war) you might become a war target to someone else? Or remove suicide ganking because it is "unintuitive" that CONCORD may not be able to save you all the time?

These risks are what make the game interesting to play (otherwise everyone will just fit max yield/cargo), and are honestly the only significant non-consensual risks to players in highsec (although to be clear, dying unexpectedly to a corpmate is probably at least an order of magnitude less frequent than the other two). I agree there is no "right way" to play, but there is a "right way" to design a sandbox game - and that is to implement at least some measure of risk vs. reward balance across all activities.

If you want a 100% safe space for new players then just make one (as part of a NPE revamp?) with the appropriate levels of rewards, but highsec is suppose to be a place with risk as CCP Falcon has recently reminded us.

Best of luck on your CSM campaign.



I'm not worried about the impacts on culture or training. RvB's use case is entirely valid, and while I share your concern there, it also comes down to a comparative harms argument. To that end, Mangala of RvB and I have gone over this extensively, and we're both confident that CCP's planned implementation will be solid. Could that change? Sure, it's possible, and time will tell.

As for the rest, I don't own a set of skis so I try to stay off of the slippery slopes.

On twitter @siggonK

Rhavas
Noble Sentiments
Second Empire.
#15 - 2014-12-04 05:48:43 UTC
I'll admit I was pretty skeptical of Sion last year, but as top of the Goon ballot he was getting in regardless. I've watched the summit minutes, Twitter and various other public outlets closely for his contributions this year and have been pleasantly surprised with what I've seen. Sion came in looking like a "typical meta-only Goon director" but has shown a solid breadth of capability and knowledge, not just an axe to grind for what can help the CFC. He is clearly thinking about what is good for the game as well.

I'm going to be sorry to see Mynnna's expertise in the financials go away, but Sion will be getting an endorsement from me in my endorsement post this year, despite that it is irrelevant to his election.

My only advice? More posts please, either on a blog or TMDC, whatever. Your writeup of the monument thing was fantastic. I'd love to see you post thoughts at that level of depth on more in-game topics.

The key question is: will you or Endie be top of ballot for the CFC?

Thanks for your service and proving my concerns wrong this term, Sion.

Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary

Xenuria
#16 - 2014-12-04 17:28:18 UTC
Sion Kumitomo wrote:


1. Goonswarm has a long history of bringing in newbees and in general being a newbee friendly organization.


According to official Goonswarm documents and Wikis, the only group of players that the CFC are not allowed to scam are people in the CFC or who are blue to them. The same documents used for legitimate recruitment of new members from SA into Goonwaffe also provide links to guides on how to scam newer or less experienced players out of their space cash. Goonswarm even has several dummy sites hosted for the sole purpose of convincing people to provide 500Million isk collateral and a full API key in exchange for membership in goonswarm.

In fact the only time when it was against goonswarm policy to scam or otherwise exploit newbies (or any player for that matter) it was also long before members were allowed to post on the eve forums.


At present there exists no official rule or policy prohibiting candidates or members of the CSM from lying to their constituents. If I am elected I hope to change that.

Sion Kumitomo
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#17 - 2014-12-05 01:29:47 UTC
Rhavas wrote:
My only advice? More posts please, either on a blog or TMDC, whatever. Your writeup of the monument thing was fantastic. I'd love to see you post thoughts at that level of depth on more in-game topics.

Thanks for your service and proving my concerns wrong this term, Sion.


I'd definitely like to post and communicate more, I certainly have a lot I'd like to say. My problem is freeing up the time for it. Being the COO of GSF, running a coalition, doing diplomacy and running our diplomatic wing, CSMing, and then real life eats up a lot of time if you want to do any of it well. I've got fantastic time management skills, but unless I can flat out add more time to the day I have to prioritize. I've space fired myself from a few space jobs to make room as is.

Thanks for the thanks too. Though it seems like you set rather a low bar to clear. Which is good. My vertical is awful.

On twitter @siggonK

Rhavas
Noble Sentiments
Second Empire.
#18 - 2014-12-05 05:26:41 UTC
Sion Kumitomo wrote:
Thanks for the thanks too. Though it seems like you set rather a low bar to clear. Which is good. My vertical is awful.


LOL, you're top of the CFC ballot, so I could say whatever I like and it wouldn't make a difference up or down. So you get my honest opinion given that you're in no matter what. ;)

Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary

Xander Phoena
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#19 - 2014-12-08 20:34:13 UTC
Sion and I haven't always seen eye to eye during CSM9. Some of that is public knowledge, some less so. For what it's worth, he is easily in the top two or three hardest workers on CSM9 and while we may disagree from time to time, I have absolute belief that he cares about the future of the game. He doesn't need my endorsement but someone who works so hard and has such passion for the game has it anyway.

www.crossingzebras.com

Endie von Posts
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#20 - 2014-12-09 14:34:29 UTC
I’ve known and worked with Sion for years, and he is a calm, methodical and thoughtful person who knows nullsec Eve in particular extraordinarily well. He has made an excellent CSM so far and I have no doubt he will be even more effective next time. You just need to read the minutes to see the impact he has made.
123Next pageLast page