These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Malcanis for CSM 8 Vote till you drop

First post
Author
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#361 - 2013-02-13 17:34:44 UTC
Sorry, you won't be getting my vote.
Our conversations have lead me to believe that you are the trying to play the "moderate" in the war of null sec against high sec.

Rest of the world, excuse the u.s.- centric analogy, but If the goons and their ilk are the Tea Party, you are Romney.
The fact that you posted on the goons' version of Pravda DOES mean you are affiliated with them, or have like-minded views.

And their views on the game are well-documented, which is the destruction of all space that they cannot control in game.
Putting you on the CSM would be no better, nor no worse, than most of the existing null sec mouthpieces.

I simply don't believe we need more null sec mouthpieces who espouse "balancing the game" at the expense of high sec.
If we went with representation by demographics, fully half of the CSM would be high sec.

Instead, we are faced with likely 9-12 of the 14 being null sec zealots or so-called null sec "moderates", which although you have never called yourself one, you have certainly done the dance of one, until you are of course elected.
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#362 - 2013-02-13 17:47:33 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Sorry, you won't be getting my vote.


This is almost enough of an endorsement to make me not want to vote mynna!

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["

Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#363 - 2013-02-13 18:22:31 UTC
Malcanis needs to broaden his appeal to the blatantly mentally ill.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal

GallowsCalibrator
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#364 - 2013-02-13 18:42:09 UTC
Perhaps he should consult with other CSM candidates on how best to appeal to the blatantly mentally ill?
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#365 - 2013-02-13 22:48:09 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Sorry, you won't be getting my vote.


This is almost enough of an endorsement to make me not want to vote mynna!



Blah blah, blah, another goon propagandist.
How many "official" goons will be on this CSM, and how many "unofficial" ones, like Malcanis?
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#366 - 2013-02-13 23:52:49 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Sorry, you won't be getting my vote.


This is almost enough of an endorsement to make me not want to vote mynna!



Blah blah, blah, another goon propagandist.
How many "official" goons will be on this CSM, and how many "unofficial" ones, like Malcanis?


All will be goons with Scooter McGabe, Vote now!!!!!!!!1

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne

GallowsCalibrator
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#367 - 2013-02-14 10:32:09 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Sorry, you won't be getting my vote.


This is almost enough of an endorsement to make me not want to vote mynna!



Blah blah, blah, another goon propagandist.
How many "official" goons will be on this CSM, and how many "unofficial" ones, like Malcanis?



Goooooons goony goon goons.

Goons?

GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONS.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#368 - 2013-02-14 20:47:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Sorry, you won't be getting my vote.
Our conversations have lead me to believe that you are the trying to play the "moderate" in the war of null sec against high sec.

Rest of the world, excuse the u.s.- centric analogy, but If the goons and their ilk are the Tea Party, you are Romney.
The fact that you posted on the goons' version of Pravda DOES mean you are affiliated with them, or have like-minded views.

And their views on the game are well-documented, which is the destruction of all space that they cannot control in game.
Putting you on the CSM would be no better, nor no worse, than most of the existing null sec mouthpieces.

I simply don't believe we need more null sec mouthpieces who espouse "balancing the game" at the expense of high sec.
If we went with representation by demographics, fully half of the CSM would be high sec.

Instead, we are faced with likely 9-12 of the 14 being null sec zealots or so-called null sec "moderates", which although you have never called yourself one, you have certainly done the dance of one, until you are of course elected.


Apologies for not replying sooner; my HTC was censoring my replies to some people whilst allowing others through.

Dinsdale, I spoke honestly and frankly with you. I'm sorry that wasn't sufficient to allay your suspicions, but as long as you insist on viewing every action taken by every player as either supporting or opposing this "war on hi-sec" that obesses you, there's little I can do to reach you and those like you.

I will state for the record that I don't want hi-sec nerfed, but instead improved and enabled for high-level play, and that I unequivocally reject the idea that players who are happy in hisec should in any way be "forced" or "driven" into 0.0. My only concern in that regard is to facilitate those players who feel penned in to hisec to be more able to venture forth and try something else.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#369 - 2013-02-14 20:59:30 UTC
Agnar Volta wrote:
I have a question, but it needs a bit of a intro.

In LS today is hard to "lurk" around without being chased and killed in short order. So new player have problem with the initial steps in PVE, industry or socializing in this environment. I can honestly say that all players that I know started making contacts in HS with established corps before making the move to LS.

And now for the question: Do you see this scenario as a problem or LS is fine the way it is? Would you support some mechanic that makes it more safe for people to fleet with strangers without being blown up? Would you have any other alternative ideas to help newbs give their first steps in LS?


You were another victim of the insidious HTC censorship campaign

In short: I am OK with what you describe.

Players joining up with existing corps to get an 'in' to lo-sec sounds perfectly fine to me if they don't have the chops to make it on their own without assistance. I am very much against the idea of reducing difficulty to that of the lowest denominator of solo "didnt read" type play, and the changes needed to accomodate such playstyles would inevitably be highly exploitatable by more skilled, experienced players. By law.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#370 - 2013-02-14 21:15:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
Malcanis wrote:
My only concern in that regard is to facilitate those players who feel penned in to hisec to be more able to venture forth and try something else.


Hopping on this point: As part of my dealing with new players in high sec alliances, I've noticed that they arrive with a nearly mythical fear of lowsec. It has been easier for us to get them to venture into wormholes, which, from a strict risk-analysis perspective, makes no sense at all. But that's what I've seen. I found a straight "don't go into low sec, everyone will just shoot you" message in the NPE (Advanced Military, IIRC, which is somewhat ironic), and that can't help, but I'm wondering what else makes low sec seem so threatening, and how can it be countered?

In my own case, ignorance was bliss. Almost exactly a year ago, I was shooting through Amamake in frigates, destroyers and shuttles 2-4 times a week, unaware that it was one of the most infamous systems in EVE. But since I was entering through a low sec gate, and leaving through a low sec gate, it never struck me as any different from the surrounding systems.

Also, do you believe that the NPE should teach what are now considered basic survival skills (D-scan, safes, tacticals, undocks, etc.), so that new players have more confidence in dangerous situations?

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Fredfredbug4
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#371 - 2013-02-14 22:15:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Fredfredbug4
I like you, we seem to share similar ideas on what Hi-sec should be as well as low-sec and nullsec. We see so many extremes regarding this topic. It feels like half the people are trying to outright destroy hi-sec, where as the other half want to make hi-sec like a completely separate game from the rest of EVE.

It's clear that hi-sec has a place in EVE, however it should be more towards helping people get on their feet and eventually move to null or low. I like your idea for L5s, I feel that this will allow players to gradually take a dip into low and null. Going from hi-sec to null or low is like jumping directly into a very cold pool, it can be a less desirable thing to do for people who aren't as confident in their ability to survive out of hi-sec. The transition should be more like getting your feet wet or rather there should be an option to slowly move down the proverbial stairs in the pool that is low/null rather than just a diving board.

Giving players a little bit of low/null as well as PVP combat at a time will help them make the transition and truly understand which sec they like more rather than just living in hi-sec.

Low and Null should be merciless and brutal, hi-sec should be a place that will slowly but surely, make people acceptable of this brutality.

Watch_ Fred Fred Frederation_ and stop [u]cryptozoologist[/u]! Fight against the brutal genocide of fictional creatures across New Eden! Is that a metaphor? Probably not, but the fru-fru- people will sure love it!

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#372 - 2013-02-15 08:02:19 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
[quote=Malcanis]

Also, do you believe that the NPE should teach what are now considered basic survival skills (D-scan, safes, tacticals, undocks, etc.), so that new players have more confidence in dangerous situations?


My view is that the NPE can teach what I would term as technical skills; how to use the scanner, how to use probes and so forth. But that nothing short of actual experience in FFA space can truly teach the why and when and who and if not to.

Really quite early in my career I found myself trying to run a corp in Curse (NPC space being to sov 0.0 what lo-sec is to hi-sec), and I found the experience utterly invaluable: the opportunity to gain situational awareness, spatial awareness, the immense power of a co-ordinated group vs a disorganised mob. (Also I made a lot more ISK!)

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#373 - 2013-02-15 08:14:15 UTC
Fredfredbug4 wrote:
I like you, we seem to share similar ideas on what Hi-sec should be as well as low-sec and nullsec. We see so many extremes regarding this topic. It feels like half the people are trying to outright destroy hi-sec, where as the other half want to make hi-sec like a completely separate game from the rest of EVE.

It's clear that hi-sec has a place in EVE, however it should be more towards helping people get on their feet and eventually move to null or low. I like your idea for L5s, I feel that this will allow players to gradually take a dip into low and null. Going from hi-sec to null or low is like jumping directly into a very cold pool, it can be a less desirable thing to do for people who aren't as confident in their ability to survive out of hi-sec. The transition should be more like getting your feet wet or rather there should be an option to slowly move down the proverbial stairs in the pool that is low/null rather than just a diving board.

Giving players a little bit of low/null as well as PVP combat at a time will help them make the transition and truly understand which sec they like more rather than just living in hi-sec.

Low and Null should be merciless and brutal, hi-sec should be a place that will slowly but surely, make people acceptable of this brutality.


I'm afraid we may not be quite as in synch as you think. Providing a nursery pool for new players who are prospective 0.0 players is certainly one of hi-sec's functions, but I don't think that it's hi-sec primary function. I'm 100% alongside helping new players who want to transition into 0.0, and many of the ideas I suggested would indeed help them gain confidence in their abilities by allowing them to 'dabble' in the lifestyle. But. By definition, pre-nullseccers using hi-sec as a lillypad to make the jump are always going to be a small part of the hi-sec demographic.

Indeed the manifesto that I wrote had as its core thesis that we should stop crippling hi-sec by thinking of it as a noob/starter area, and start unleashing its potential by thinking of it as an area for convenience play. I have more faith in EVE players than many seem to, and I think that we can add experiences to hi-sec that were limited to the "hard-core" areas that the "convenience" players have been excluded from until now, and that many of the "convenience" players actually do quite like the idea of being able to occasionally take big risks for big rewards, participate in large scale combat, and so on, providing that they can do so in the limited game time they have available.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Signal11th
#374 - 2013-02-15 08:41:48 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Fredfredbug4 wrote:
I like you, we seem to share similar ideas on what Hi-sec should be as well as low-sec and nullsec. We see so many extremes regarding this topic. It feels like half the people are trying to outright destroy hi-sec, where as the other half want to make hi-sec like a completely separate game from the rest of EVE.

It's clear that hi-sec has a place in EVE, however it should be more towards helping people get on their feet and eventually move to null or low. I like your idea for L5s, I feel that this will allow players to gradually take a dip into low and null. Going from hi-sec to null or low is like jumping directly into a very cold pool, it can be a less desirable thing to do for people who aren't as confident in their ability to survive out of hi-sec. The transition should be more like getting your feet wet or rather there should be an option to slowly move down the proverbial stairs in the pool that is low/null rather than just a diving board.

Giving players a little bit of low/null as well as PVP combat at a time will help them make the transition and truly understand which sec they like more rather than just living in hi-sec.

Low and Null should be merciless and brutal, hi-sec should be a place that will slowly but surely, make people acceptable of this brutality.


I'm afraid we may not be quite as in synch as you think. Providing a nursery pool for new players who are prospective 0.0 players is certainly one of hi-sec's functions, but I don't think that it's hi-sec primary function. I'm 100% alongside helping new players who want to transition into 0.0, and many of the ideas I suggested would indeed help them gain confidence in their abilities by allowing them to 'dabble' in the lifestyle. But. By definition, pre-nullseccers using hi-sec as a lillypad to make the jump are always going to be a small part of the hi-sec demographic.

Indeed the manifesto that I wrote had as its core thesis that we should stop crippling hi-sec by thinking of it as a noob/starter area, and start unleashing its potential by thinking of it as an area for convenience play. I have more faith in EVE players than many seem to, and I think that we can add experiences to hi-sec that were limited to the "hard-core" areas that the "convenience" players have been excluded from until now, and that many of the "convenience" players actually do quite like the idea of being able to occasionally take big risks for big rewards, participate in large scale combat, and so on, providing that they can do so in the limited game time they have available.



Come on Malcanis is using words like "demographic" and "thesis" what's not to like!!! You may or may not agree with his Eve political affiliations or his moderate view but at least his arguments are "usually" well thought out and relevant.

Obviously he's not as good as me buts that to be expected, so until next year when I join the fray he's the best one (out of a bad bunch..couldn't resist)

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!

Dyvim Slorm
Coven of the Morrigan
#375 - 2013-02-16 16:57:33 UTC
Firstly my apologies if you have already covered this, I haven't read every page of this thread.

I was wondering as to your view regarding the balance between high, low and null.

It my my *perception* (and I use that word advisedly) that null and low have almost swapped places. Back in the "good old days" we used to have a clear path for training new pilots, start them in highsec, then move them to low to harden them up and then to null once they had proved their worth.

It does seem now that the path is more high -> null -> low as it certainly appears that null is a better environment to train rookies in the next stages rather than low.

Do you have a view on how the balance would be corrected, or the perception changed if this is incorrect, or if it even needs changing?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#376 - 2013-02-16 17:09:05 UTC
Dyvim Slorm wrote:
Firstly my apologies if you have already covered this, I haven't read every page of this thread.

I was wondering as to your view regarding the balance between high, low and null.

It my my *perception* (and I use that word advisedly) that null and low have almost swapped places. Back in the "good old days" we used to have a clear path for training new pilots, start them in highsec, then move them to low to harden them up and then to null once they had proved their worth.

It does seem now that the path is more high -> null -> low as it certainly appears that null is a better environment to train rookies in the next stages rather than low.

Do you have a view on how the balance would be corrected, or the perception changed if this is incorrect, or if it even needs changing?


I think that neither high nor low nor null should be "the" place to be. Each should offer a distinctive style of game experience, and each should be able to offer both low and high-level gameplay. There's no moral merit in being in 0.0; many people simply lack the ability or the desire to comiit the time and resources that fully engaging in the sov 0.0 lifestyle demands; others prefer to operate in smaller sized groups where individual skill and talent count for more. That doesn't make them bad people or even bad players let alone "irrelevant".

And as I've mentioned above, we should enable the widest possible range of professions and provide the potential for the widest possible range of experiences in each zone. I don't accept that hi-sec should be the only place it's worthwhile to be a producer. Equally, I don't accept that living in hi-sec means that you shouldn't get the chance to experience big fights or extended campaigns.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#377 - 2013-02-17 21:39:00 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I simply don't believe we need more null sec mouthpieces who espouse "balancing the game" at the expense of high sec.
If we went with representation by demographics, fully half of the CSM would be high sec.

Instead, we are faced with likely 9-12 of the 14 being null sec zealots or so-called null sec "moderates", which although you have never called yourself one, you have certainly done the dance of one, until you are of course elected.


Voter apathy. Don't complain about nullsec residents voting for who they want on the CSM, blame everyone else that doesn't bother voting at all.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#378 - 2013-02-17 21:43:24 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I simply don't believe we need more null sec mouthpieces who espouse "balancing the game" at the expense of high sec.
If we went with representation by demographics, fully half of the CSM would be high sec.

Instead, we are faced with likely 9-12 of the 14 being null sec zealots or so-called null sec "moderates", which although you have never called yourself one, you have certainly done the dance of one, until you are of course elected.


Voter apathy. Don't complain about nullsec residents voting for who they want on the CSM, blame everyone else that doesn't bother voting at all.


I largely agree with this. I can understand the individual "hi-seccer" approaching the existing circumstance with a sceptical eye, but let us see a similar effort from "hi-sec" focused candidates first before we accept complaints that there's any kind of discrimination.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Vortexo VonBrenner
Doomheim
#379 - 2013-02-17 22:09:18 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I simply don't believe we need more null sec mouthpieces who espouse "balancing the game" at the expense of high sec.
If we went with representation by demographics, fully half of the CSM would be high sec.

Instead, we are faced with likely 9-12 of the 14 being null sec zealots or so-called null sec "moderates", which although you have never called yourself one, you have certainly done the dance of one, until you are of course elected.


Voter apathy. Don't complain about nullsec residents voting for who they want on the CSM, blame everyone else that doesn't bother voting at all.




Ah, crud...I'm in agreement... Must you make sense, Mallak? I wouldn't want anybody to lose any slightest internetspacecred when a "pubbie" agrees with them.

Dinsdale, Malcanis' past statements or something lead you to believe that?





Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#380 - 2013-02-17 23:01:03 UTC
Vortexo VonBrenner wrote:
Dinsdale, Malcanis' past statements or something lead you to believe that?



It's something I've paid attention to over the past few years. It happens with real life political elections aswell. People say there is no one worth voting for or that they don't care, but get upset about who makes the next term. In EVE terms, there are more people living in highsec than anywhere else & it would most likely remain that way even if every null/low/WH resident left. Highsec denizens have the power to vote in more highsec orientated reps, but unfortunately many of them deem it a complete waste of time. Others don't even know what the CSM is & that isn't limited to new players either.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.