These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

NULL whiners mantra is getting tedious... and CSM lacks HI SEC representation

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#941 - 2012-09-05 16:06:32 UTC
DarthNefarius wrote:
Your stawmen like the scarecrow in the Wizard of OZ just has no brains

This word, "strawmen", I don't think it means what you think it does.

DarthNefarius wrote:
the appearance of extreme imbalances of any region/player grounp in the CSM

What is needed for you to call a candidate a "hisec candidate"?

DarthNefarius wrote:
moon goo bottleneck concentrated in one region

You mean the thing which appeared all the way back with dominion, i.e. 2.5 years ago, along with a monumental nerf to nullsec balance and fun in the shape of supercaps fuckups and a sov system which sucked all the dicks on the way to the parking lot?

DarthNefarius wrote:
or the current HI SECNULL SEC mineral imbalance

Which mineral imbalance?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#942 - 2012-09-05 16:19:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
DarthNefarius wrote:
Your stawmen
Which ones are that?

Quote:
the appearance of extreme imbalances of any region/player grounp in the CSM
…which is a problem, how, exactly?

Quote:
moon goo bottleneck concentrated in one region
…which lost one of its biggest champions for change as a result of Mittanigate. Oh, and funnily enough, quite contrary to the whole “we need representation or what we want won't happen” undercurrent going through this whole debate, that particular issue has been on the agenda since 2009 or so in spite of having constant attention from the representatives. By the way, since you're so fond of brooms, want to guess which CSM was in charge when that happened?

Quote:
or the current HI SECNULL SEC mineral imbalance
So… you want to remove minerals from highsec? Or do you want to seed more low-ends in null? Or do you want to shift more industry slots from high to null? After all, the current mineral imbalance is that the low-ends — most commonly mined in highsec — are in higher demand and need to be imported en masse to null for those projects that can only be completed in null, and that even for the ores only available in null, you want to move most of them to high because that's where the production capacity for everything else is… oh wait, that's a very interesting interdependent balance as it turns out.

The representation on the CSM is as fair as the players want it to be, but again, that's just appearance. This whole notion of “seclevel categorisation” as a measure of representation is fundamentally flawed and wrong-headed — it's all about the issues, and guess what? This very thread has shown that the highseccers have a much worse grasp of those issues than the suppsed nullseccers do…
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#943 - 2012-09-05 16:27:17 UTC
ITT: Zim and Tippia practice their point by point breakdowns.

Challenge of the day: can anyone get them to break down the posts of the other?

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Anslo
Scope Works
#944 - 2012-09-05 16:28:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Anslo
Tippia wrote:
Which ones are that?


You use this word too much.

Quote:
the appearance of extreme imbalances of any region/player grounp in the CSM…which is a problem, how, exactly?


Because players who live in highsec and actually play and not mine afk all day have a different perspective than nulsec people who JC to highsec for isk, trade, minerals, etc.

Quote:
…which lost one of its biggest champions for change as a result of Mittanigate. Oh, and funnily enough, quite contrary to the whole “we need representation or what we want won't happen” undercurrent going through this whole debate, that particular issue has been on the agenda since 2009 or so in spite of having constant attention from the representatives.


Yeeeaaah you're basically right on the money with this.

Quote:
The representation on the CSM is as fair as the players want it to be, but again, that's just appearance. This whole notion of “seclevel categorisation” as a measure of representation is fundamentally flawed and wrong-headed


Not really. Carebears should have their own rep, an ACTUAL rep who see's the mutually beneficial relationship between high sec, lowsec and nul players would provide diversity to the CSM. Yeah sure the nul people on CSM, despite my trolololing, DO realize high sec can use improvement in some places because well, nul and low need high and vice versa, high needs nul and low. So it's not flawed really, it wouldn't hurt at all to have a balanced carebear on CSM to provide insight.

Quote:
— it's all about the issues, and guess what? This very thread has shown that the highseccers have a much worse grasp of those issues than the suppsed nullseccers do…


Not really, it's just troll bait for alts to pose as ignorant care bears.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#945 - 2012-09-05 16:39:00 UTC
Anslo wrote:
You use this word too much.
People use the fallacy too much.

Quote:
Because players who live in highsec and actually play and not mine afk all day have a different perspective than nulsec people who JC to highsec for isk, trade, minerals, etc.
Yes. An incomplete perspective. Often, as previous “highsec reps” have shown, it's also a directly harmful perspective.

Quote:
Not really. Carebears should have their own rep
…aaaaaand right there is why I'm saying that seclevel categorisation is wrong-headed. A highsec rep cannot be a carebear rep because then he no longer represents highsec. A highsec rep needs to be able to represent me, who is apparently somewhat famous in my stance towards carebears. Again, it's the issues that require representation, not the sec levels. My highsec issues are represented splendidly by nullsec reps because they have that larger perspective and, persistent but largely unfounded assertions to the contrary, they do have a good insight into highsec.
Anslo
Scope Works
#946 - 2012-09-05 16:46:31 UTC
Tippia wrote:
…aaaaaand right there is why I'm saying that seclevel categorisation is wrong-headed. A highsec rep cannot be a carebear rep because then he no longer represents highsec. A highsec rep needs to be able to represent me, who is apparently somewhat famous in my stance towards carebears. Again, it's the issues that require representation, not the sec levels. My highsec issues are represented splendidly by nullsec reps because they have that larger perspective and, persistent but largely unfounded assertions to the contrary, they do have a good insight into highsec.


Alright, I'll own up to this one. HIGHSEC rep. I use the two interchangeably when I really shouldn't. Sorry.

And I agree, like I said before, they have good insight. But the thing is they don't LIVE there. Sure they stop by now and then for isk and trades and lulz, but they don't actually live there regularly. The nulsec people understand the relationship between nul and high and how they both need each other, but what about the players that don't care or deal with nul? Who enjoy the storyline of the game? The Plexes? The one's who'd LIKE to have harder missions or methods to fight gankers on better terms than 8 v 1, some kind of even footing or even method to effectively hire mercs or REALLY collect on bounties? What about them?

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#947 - 2012-09-05 16:54:27 UTC
lol at people invoking strawman when there are none. Tippia actually knows what the word means and is thus justified in using it as many times as he feels necessary.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Ryoken McKeon
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#948 - 2012-09-05 17:10:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Ryoken McKeon
Anslo wrote:
Tippia wrote:
…aaaaaand right there is why I'm saying that seclevel categorisation is wrong-headed. A highsec rep cannot be a carebear rep because then he no longer represents highsec. A highsec rep needs to be able to represent me, who is apparently somewhat famous in my stance towards carebears. Again, it's the issues that require representation, not the sec levels. My highsec issues are represented splendidly by nullsec reps because they have that larger perspective and, persistent but largely unfounded assertions to the contrary, they do have a good insight into highsec.


Alright, I'll own up to this one. HIGHSEC rep. I use the two interchangeably when I really shouldn't. Sorry.

And I agree, like I said before, they have good insight. But the thing is they don't LIVE there. Sure they stop by now and then for isk and trades and lulz, but they don't actually live there regularly. The nulsec people understand the relationship between nul and high and how they both need each other, but what about the players that don't care or deal with nul? Who enjoy the storyline of the game? The Plexes? The one's who'd LIKE to have harder missions or methods to fight gankers on better terms than 8 v 1, some kind of even footing or even method to effectively hire mercs or REALLY collect on bounties? What about them?



Most of the major nullsec power blocs are run by people whose characters are very old. People who have lived in high sec and who know far, far more about it than you do. They know more about high sec player habits than you do. Something that high sec players don't usually understand (because people who leave high sec tend to stay gone) is that they are on the low end of the totem pole experience-wise. They tend to be (much) less involved in the metagame than players from other areas and they tend to be younger within the game. They assume that other players are as inexperienced as they are and so they think that when nullsec players want to make a change they actively want to 'nerf high sec' which is not the case at all. They want to change high sec so that the entire game is better for everyone, most high sec players don't know what's going on outside of their own corp though and have no idea about the history of the game or the CSM. Additionally, they can't be bothered to organize enough to actually elect candidates in an election with very few voters. No effort.


What it comes down to is this: High sec players are more like the average WoW player than others in EVE: Ignorant, whiny, entitled. No, you shouldn't get a CSM delegate without doing the requisite work for it. Stop whining. EVE is not meant to be a game where CCP gives people whatever the **** they want just because they want it. In this game you have to put time into achieving objectives.
Anslo
Scope Works
#949 - 2012-09-05 17:19:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Anslo
First
Ryoken McKeon wrote:
What it comes down to is this: High sec players are more like the average WoW player than others in EVE: Ignorant, whiny, entitled. No, you shouldn't get a CSM delegate without doing the requisite work for it. Stop whining. EVE is not meant to be a game where CCP gives people whatever the **** they want just because they want it. In this game you have to put time into achieving objectives.


I'm not whining, I was having a discussion. Take your aggressive bullshit somewhere else. Highsec players work hard for what they have. Just because some may complain that their little corner of the galaxy might get nerfed doesn't automatically mean some elitist ******** like you gets to **** all over them. See how quickly a conversation can escalate without using a little it a decency in your communication?


Quote:
Most of the major nullsec power blocs are run by people whose characters are very old. People who have lived in high sec and who know far, far more about it than you do. They know more about high sec player habits than you do. Something that high sec players don't usually understand (because people who leave high sec tend to stay gone) is that they are on the low end of the totem pole experience-wise.


False. There are plenty of very old high sec players who prefer to stay within the Empire than others. Go into local in high and check a few character histories. Just because someone is from 2007 or 2008 does not mean they're suddenly unqualified to speak about their game or that they aren't old enough. Their opinions and experience over the years are just as valid. Now 2011 or 2012, even some 2009 players well...different story.

Quote:
They tend to be (much) less involved in the metagame than players from other areas and they tend to be younger within the game. They assume that other players are as inexperienced as they are and so they think that when nullsec players want to make a change they actively want to 'nerf high sec' which is not the case at all.


Or they could simply, you know...have lives and interest outside of Eve. There's nothing wrong with casual gamers being worried about their experience being shat on by someone they see as unruly. And they don't assume anything about inexperience. They simply see someone trying to infringe on their game (though really it isn't always the case at all like you say below) when they are only minding their own business.

Quote:
They want to change high sec so that the entire game is better for everyone, most high sec players don't know what's going on outside of their own corp though and have no idea about the history of the game or the CSM. Additionally, they can't be bothered to organize enough to actually elect candidates in an election with very few voters. No effort.


I agree. The nul blocks know a lot, a whole lot. And they know, like I said, that nul and high have a relationship that is needed. One can't live without the other. Plain and simple. As much as I troll about high sec buffs and banning pvp, high, low, and nul all relate to each other. It's how the economy is propped, people keep playing, and **** keeps happening.

As for them not organizing to vote, well I can't really argue there. If a candidate does come by for highsec players, he'll need one hell of a strategy.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#950 - 2012-09-05 19:12:29 UTC  |  Edited by: DarthNefarius
Tippia's strawman ( superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition ) was her position that HI SEC representatives are not needed in a previous argument because CCP is the de facto HI SEC representative which IS ALL WE APPEAR TO HAVE NOW. Having CCP as the only one holding back the predominately NULL CSM's suggestions just strikes me as elitist space rich looking after the poor indigant shrinking middle class HI SEC out of thealtruistic goodness of thier hearts. I don'tparticularly believe in altruism in Eve.

I've heard a few names thrown around stating that there are HI SEC representative on the council yet in the minutes I did not hear(read) those voices speak up. Do they consider themselvesHI SEC representatives? Right now it appears that the HI SEC representative is occupying Clint Eastwoods empty chair.
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#951 - 2012-09-05 19:15:47 UTC
DarthNefarius wrote:
Tippia's strawman ( superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition ) is her position that HI SEC representatives are not needed because CCP is the de facto HI SEC representative which IS ALL WE APPEAR TO HAVE NOW. I've heard a few names thrown around stating that there are HI SEC representative on the council yet in the minutes I did not hear(read) those voices speak up. Do they consider themselvesHI SEC representatives? Right now it appears that the HI SEC representative is occupying Clint Eastwoods empty chair.

So you're going to just ignore ~unpleasant~ questions (as usual) and keep spewing nonsense?

Okay, then.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#952 - 2012-09-05 19:16:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Corina Jarr
We don't need Hi sec reps because such a thing is impossible.

We need reps for:
Missions
Mining
Ganking
Salvaging
Hauling
War decs
Vulturing
Trading
Manufacturing
Scamming
Incursions
probly a few others...

All these woudl need to be covered by a "hi sec" rep. This would be highly ineffective, and likely impossible to find someone who would fight their hardest for all of that.

Edit: maybe add in there ship spinning and WiS...
Also, we may have some of those covered, I'm just listing all the activities in HS.
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#953 - 2012-09-05 19:18:35 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
DarthNefarius wrote:
Tippia's strawman ( superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition ) is her position that HI SEC representatives are not needed because CCP is the de facto HI SEC representative which IS ALL WE APPEAR TO HAVE NOW. I've heard a few names thrown around stating that there are HI SEC representative on the council yet in the minutes I did not hear(read) those voices speak up. Do they consider themselvesHI SEC representatives? Right now it appears that the HI SEC representative is occupying Clint Eastwoods empty chair.

So you're going to just ignore ~unpleasant~ questions (as usual) and keep spewing nonsense?

Okay, then.


I'm answering your statementments that there already is appropriate HI SEC representation in the CSM. I believestongly its very unbalanced.
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#954 - 2012-09-05 19:19:06 UTC
DarthNefarius wrote:
Tippia's strawman ( superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition ) is her position that HI SEC representatives are not needed because CCP is the de facto HI SEC representative which IS ALL WE APPEAR TO HAVE NOW.
Yeah, no. This will get complicated, so see if you can follow: what you described is not a strawman. You claiming that this is my position is a strawman.

Quote:
I've heard a few names thrown around stating that there are HI SEC representative on the council yet in the minutes I did not hear(read) those voices speak up.
…and was some important input missed as a result?
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#955 - 2012-09-05 19:23:41 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
We don't need Hi sec reps because such a thing is impossible.

We need reps for:
Missions
Mining
Ganking
Salvaging
Hauling
War decs
Vulturing
Trading
Manufacturing
Scamming
Incursions
probly a few others...

All these woudl need to be covered by a "hi sec" rep. This would be highly ineffective, and likely impossible to find someone who would fight their hardest for all of that.

Edit: maybe add in there ship spinning and WiS...
Also, we may have some of those covered, I'm just listing all the activities in HS.


Most these points aren't really a issue nor is there anything wrong with them. Yes it would be hard for a single person to understand and monitor all those points, but not impossible.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#956 - 2012-09-05 19:28:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
If "hi-sec" wants their own CSM rep they only have to pull together a couple of thousand votes to get one. With "70%" of the ~360,000 eligible accounts based in hi-sec that means that 1 out of every 126 "hi-seccers" needs to spend the 30 seconds required.

Givevn that they haven't done so, one can only conclude that they either don't want to or they don't think of themselves as a monolithic, single-issue lumpenproletariat.

EDIT: apparently about 2400 votes are needed to be in the "go to Iceland" part of the CSM according to Trebor's blog. So let's say 1 in every 105 "hi-seccers". Such oppression when less than ONE PERCENT of this so-called consituency need to vote in order to secure themselves a top-7 CSM rep.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#957 - 2012-09-05 19:32:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Corina Jarr
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
We don't need Hi sec reps because such a thing is impossible.

We need reps for:
Missions
Mining
Ganking
Salvaging
Hauling
War decs
Vulturing
Trading
Manufacturing
Scamming
Incursions
probly a few others...

All these woudl need to be covered by a "hi sec" rep. This would be highly ineffective, and likely impossible to find someone who would fight their hardest for all of that.

Edit: maybe add in there ship spinning and WiS...
Also, we may have some of those covered, I'm just listing all the activities in HS.


Most these points aren't really a issue nor is there anything wrong with them. Yes it would be hard for a single person to understand and monitor all those points, but not impossible.

Its not about what is wrong or broken with them. its about how proposed changes would effect them.

For example.

The changes proposed to crimewatch would effect the bolded ones, most greatly enough that they need someone to watch out for that area of the game.


The CSM isn't just there to propose fixes to broken stuff. They are also to help keep not broken stuff from being broken.
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#958 - 2012-09-05 20:03:45 UTC  |  Edited by: DarthNefarius
Corina Jarr wrote:


The CSM isn't just there to propose fixes to broken stuff. They are also to help keep not broken stuff from being broken.


Oh and I thought CSM was to keep the TECH bottle neck firmly entrenched as long as possible while saying you want TECH to be nerfed. Therefore its to keep the broken parts in place as long as possible while it helps your true constituants Pirate
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#959 - 2012-09-05 20:13:41 UTC
DarthNefarius wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:


The CSM isn't just there to propose fixes to broken stuff. They are also to help keep not broken stuff from being broken.


Oh and I thought CSM was to keep the TECH bottle neck firmly entrenched as long as possible while saying you want TECH to be nerfed. Therefore its to keep the broken parts in place as long as possible while it helps your true constituants Pirate

Dude, for someone that cares so much, it would behoove you to learn a little more...

Goonswarm has been pretty dam loud (even *BEFORE* it got implemented) about removing the bottleneck moongoos....

/facepalm

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#960 - 2012-09-05 20:15:37 UTC
DarthNefarius wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:


The CSM isn't just there to propose fixes to broken stuff. They are also to help keep not broken stuff from being broken.


Oh and I thought CSM was to keep the TECH bottle neck firmly entrenched as long as possible while saying you want TECH to be nerfed. Therefore its to keep the broken parts in place as long as possible while it helps your true constituants Pirate


Like the majority of your "thoughts" about the CSM, this one is easily contradicted by the recorded facts.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016