These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Why your CSM8 vote doesn't matter...

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dave Stark
#301 - 2013-04-08 23:42:28 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Nexus Day wrote:
Why am I imagining the OP talking in a Dwayne Johnson aka The Rock voice?



it doesn't matter what you think if you vote

Correct because in an STV system by not voting you are effecting the election exactly as if you voted for the people who everyone else is voting.

So in another words non-voters are siding with Null sec at this point. I do hope they point out when they win the massive support they got from the non-voters.

i see you've never watched any wrestling have you?

Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Exactly what sizable % demographic of eve players are saying that HMLS should reach out to 500km's these days? Oh that's right, your example has no realistic frame of reference.


you can't say csm should represent all points of view, then ignore how ******** that idea is just because i proved you wrong.
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#302 - 2013-04-08 23:45:19 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:


you can't say csm should represent all points of view, then ignore how ******** that idea is just because i proved you wrong.



You did no such thing. You simply disregarded and misread several of my posts and then patted yourself on the back.

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Frying Doom
#303 - 2013-04-08 23:46:47 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Nexus Day wrote:
Why am I imagining the OP talking in a Dwayne Johnson aka The Rock voice?



it doesn't matter what you think if you vote

Correct because in an STV system by not voting you are effecting the election exactly as if you voted for the people who everyone else is voting.

So in another words non-voters are siding with Null sec at this point. I do hope they point out when they win the massive support they got from the non-voters.

i see you've never watched any wrestling have you?

Yes American Sports Entertainment is right up their on my list of things to watch, right after the complete series of Days of our Lives. Lol

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Dave Stark
#304 - 2013-04-08 23:46:58 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:


you can't say csm should represent all points of view, then ignore how ******** that idea is just because i proved you wrong.



You did no such thing. You simply disregarded and misread several of my posts and then patted yourself on the back.


no, i quite clearly stated with justification, why csm members shouldn't champion bad ideas like you suggested.
Ai Shun
#305 - 2013-04-08 23:47:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Ai Shun
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Nowhere does it say they are there to slap down ideas princess. It says...


You need to read a bit further.

Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Nowhere does it say that the CSM has the right to screen (or slap down) any idea that has a large enough following. They are only there to convey it. You get 9.5 stars for a semi-intellgent retort however. Do you have anymore?


Quote:
What went wrong ?
The CSM represents a good cross section of Eve players and might have spotted something that needed amending in your proposal.

If the CSM rejected a proposal was it due to lack of detail? If so you can talk to any of the CSM who supported it and see about amending it for a future meeting.

Some ideas will never be accepted, this is unfortunate but not a decision taken lightly


That sounds like screening to me. They see support in Assembly Hall; discuss it at their meeting and decide if it goes to CCP or not. Screening, no?
Frying Doom
#306 - 2013-04-08 23:49:50 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:


you can't say csm should represent all points of view, then ignore how ******** that idea is just because i proved you wrong.



You did no such thing. You simply disregarded and misread several of my posts and then patted yourself on the back.

Strange how you seem to think everyone misreads your threads.

I can prove you easily wrong, you don't vote, so your opinion is irreverent.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#307 - 2013-04-08 23:54:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Eternum Praetorian
Dave Stark wrote:
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:


you can't say csm should represent all points of view, then ignore how ******** that idea is just because i proved you wrong.



You did no such thing. You simply disregarded and misread several of my posts and then patted yourself on the back.


no, i quite clearly stated with justification, why csm members shouldn't champion bad ideas like you suggested.



You invented a completely unrealistic representation of a single person's bad idea. Your example does not accurately represent any known idea on the table supported by any of EVE's various demographics or population bases. You sir, are deluding yourself because i have been happily kicking your ass repeatedly over two days (soon to be 3 ) Big smileBig smile

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Dave Stark
#308 - 2013-04-08 23:58:26 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Your example does not accurately represent any known idea on the table supported by any of EVE's various demographics or population bases. You sir, are deluding yourself because i have been happily kicking your ass repeatedly over two days (soon to be 3 ) Big smileBig smile


clearly you've never been to F&I subforum, it regularly has ideas that terrible popping up.

also, you say i'm deluding myself then claim you've been kicking my ass repeatedly for two days. yet i've been in the thread for like 2 hours, not to mention kicking my ass at what?
hint: you're the delusional one.
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#309 - 2013-04-08 23:59:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Eternum Praetorian
@Ai Shun


You are inferring meaning where there is none. According to that text the CSM specifically can reject ideas that 1. are not detailed enough and 2. do not have a large enough of a following. So they are either not prepared in a cohesive enough, well thought out and realized manner (or) there are simply not enough people following it for it to be a worth while pursuit.



Nowhere does it say that a CSM is endowed with the authority to judge whether or not any idea that is 1. properly presented and 2. has a large enough following is "worthy" to be brought before CCP. Aka... they are not endowed with the power to slap down stupid ideas as the CSM want-to-be suggests.



You are wrong.

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Frying Doom
#310 - 2013-04-09 00:00:27 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
You sir, are deluding yourself because i have been happily kicking your ass repeatedly over two days (soon to be 3 ) Big smileBig smile

Seriously, your that delusional.

Maybe we have worked out why you will not vote, the pink monkeys told you not too.Lol

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#311 - 2013-04-09 00:01:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Eternum Praetorian
Frying Doom wrote:

Strange how you seem to think everyone misreads your threads.

I can prove you easily wrong, you don't vote, so your opinion is irreverent.



No there are about 3 idiots here who are. Guess what? Your opinion is not relevant either. The CSM you voted for has his own agenda and idea of what eve online should be. That makes you a foolish puppet of a flawed system, happily swimming in his own ignorant delusions.


Enjoy yourself. But i am not buying Blink

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#312 - 2013-04-09 00:04:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Eternum Praetorian
Dave Stark wrote:

clearly you've never been to F&I subforum, it regularly has ideas that terrible popping up..




Oh really? Ones with a reasonable amount of playerbase support? Ah... that's nice. RollShockedArrowArrowArrow



Dave Stark wrote:
also, you say i'm deluding myself then claim you've been kicking my ass repeatedly for two days. yet i've been in the thread for like 2 hours,



I thought I remembered you from yesterday. Oh well, all of you avatars basically look alike anyway. Except for me that is.

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Dave Stark
#313 - 2013-04-09 00:05:54 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
I thought I remembered you from yesterday. Oh well, all of you avatars basically look alike anyway. Except for me that is.


the prosecution moves to dismiss all arguments due to mental instability.
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#314 - 2013-04-09 00:07:43 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
I thought I remembered you from yesterday. Oh well, all of you avatars basically look alike anyway. Except for me that is.


the prosecution moves to dismiss all arguments due to mental instability.



The last resort of a debater that no longer has a leg to stand on. You try being in an argument with several forum trolls at the end of the second day and see if you remember them all. I am doing pretty good Cool

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Dave Stark
#315 - 2013-04-09 00:11:00 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
I thought I remembered you from yesterday. Oh well, all of you avatars basically look alike anyway. Except for me that is.


the prosecution moves to dismiss all arguments due to mental instability.



The last resort of a debater that no longer has a leg to stand on. You try being in an argument with several forum trolls at the end of the second day and see if you remember them all. I am doing pretty good Cool


actually it was complete sarcasm, but you seem to be far too serious to understand and have a giggle.
your loss.
Frying Doom
#316 - 2013-04-09 00:11:28 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
I thought I remembered you from yesterday. Oh well, all of you avatars basically look alike anyway. Except for me that is.


the prosecution moves to dismiss all arguments due to mental instability.



The last resort of a debater that no longer has a leg to stand on. You try being in an argument with several forum trolls at the end of the second day and see if you remember them all. I am doing pretty good Cool

Lol

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#317 - 2013-04-09 00:15:57 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:


actually it was complete sarcasm, but you seem to be far too serious to understand and have a giggle.
your loss.



You must have missed the part where I called the other guy a poopyface. Big smile

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Dave Stark
#318 - 2013-04-09 00:26:55 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:


actually it was complete sarcasm, but you seem to be far too serious to understand and have a giggle.
your loss.



You must have missed the part where I called the other guy a poopyface. Big smile


you know, i'm *almost* tempted to go through your posting history to see if you did.
part of me really hopes you did.
Ai Shun
#319 - 2013-04-09 00:32:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Ai Shun
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
@Ai Shun


You are inferring meaning where there is none. According to that text the CSM specifically can reject ideas that 1. are not detailed enough and 2. do not have a large enough of a following. So they are either not prepared in a cohesive enough, well thought out and realized manner (or) there are simply not enough people following it for it to be a worth while pursuit.



Nowhere does it say that a CSM is endowed with the authority to judge whether or not any idea that is 1. properly presented and 2. has a large enough following is "worthy" to be brought before CCP. Aka... they are not endowed with the power to slap down stupid ideas as the CSM want-to-be suggests.



You are wrong.


You conveniently left off two things.

1. If the CSM rejected a proposal was it due to lack of detail? That language construct says there are other reasons. No ifs or buts about it; that's simply how English and communication therein works. Maybe it is not phrased as the author intended it; but then they would not have:

2. Some ideas will never be accepted, this is unfortunate but not a decision taken lightly. The CSM does have the ability to reject an idea out of hand.

Sorry mate, I know you desperately want to be right on this one but from what is written on the CSM and documented about their processes you are not.
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#320 - 2013-04-09 00:42:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Eternum Praetorian
Ai Shun wrote:


Sorry mate, I know you desperately want to be right on this one but from what is written on the CSM and documented about their processes you are not.



Bullshit...mate. The CSM does not have the authority to reject an idea that is both well worded and has a notable following--and then choose not bring said idea to the table at CCP. He/she may do so anyway, but that is not in their actual authority. Sorry. No way no how.

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]