These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

CSM8 First Impressions: I am disappoint.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#21 - 2013-05-24 21:14:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
mynnna wrote:
Right, okay. And yeah, I've seen that entry, which is where I pulled the "not really supported" from.


Except, of course, for where they explicitly do. This is one of the goals behind the launcher project, insofar as I understand it. Multiboxing is a bunch of half-supported-kinda chaos right now, and they want to bring it formally into the game.

mynnna wrote:
However, I also saw(I can't recall where, I'd have to dig it up from the blue post tracker) one of the devs asking after someone about what they chose to run multiple clients for, so it does seem to be something CCP is pursuing.


Since I'm given to understand that you guys are currently buried under a mountain of reading, here are some links to dev posts, mostly from CCP Atropos:

Preliminary statements of recognition/support for multiboxing, from the test server feedback thread:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2999999#post2999999
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3062199#post3062199

From the (now locked) announcement thread:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3067196#post3067196

From the General Discussion Thread:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3078806#post3078806

I gather from these that he has at least a pretty good handle on the number and extent of customizations that people have improvised out of the available tools. Based on that, I'd say that if he wants to cover all the bases, this is a fairly major project. If he doesn't, he can expect to hear from a number of hardcore players.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
rswfire
#22 - 2013-05-24 21:21:01 UTC
Rengerel en Distel wrote:
The EULA changed, that's why you had to accept it again.


This is only partly true. Each time I enter an account that gets dropped from the seven in the pull-down menu, I have to re-accept the EULA for that account. It doesn't "remember" that I've accepted it because it sees it as a "new account" being logged into from that launcher.

Rengerel en Distel wrote:
There were many posts about work-arounds for launching many accounts bypassing the launcher altogether.


I'm aware of this and use it, but they've already stated they are removing this functionality sometime after Odyssey.

Rengerel en Distel wrote:
Still not sure what you expect the CSM to do that wasn't done by the "sizable minority" that posted the problems in the thread. I don't think Mynnna saying that multiboxers find the new launcher cumbersome will add more authority to the issue.


I don't really expect anything from the CSM. Mynnna asked the question, so I provided my own personal answer. The only thing I'd ask of the CSM is to be respectful; quite a lot of them are not, sadly. I'd really like to see some more professionalism from them on the forums (and this is not directed at Mynnna.)

mynnna wrote:
Fair point. I've got 11 accounts myself but only ever run more than a few at a time, so it hadn't really occurred to me. Blink

Did the old launcher remember an "arbitrarily long" list of login names?


Yes, and because the settings were not stored in a cloud, I was actually able to go into a settings file on my computer and alphabetize my usernames -- "OCD." :)

About Firesworn Nation .|. FB .|. G+ .|. Steam
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#23 - 2013-05-25 00:23:30 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
None ofthe Above wrote:
We did hear from Mike on Podside that there have been well attended meetings with CCP, including Trebor. I remain concerned that Trebor thinks his job is primarily about managing his/CSM's relationship with CCP and little else.

In his defense we did get a blog post lately, about as the launcher problems were surfacing although clearly written before:

http://treborofthecsm.blogspot.com/2013/05/csm-update.html

He hasn't picked up on the trick of posting here on the forums that a blog post is available.


I'm not even attacking him really, just pointing out that he's not what you would call a vocal participant in external things. Largely inactive twitter, blog that is more or less neglected outside of election season, not all that active on the official forums either. That's how he's been before this CSM, not much of a reason to think that'll magically change.

Whether that's a problem to you or not depends who you are, I guess. Clearly wasn't a problem to either the people who voted for him despite it, or the CSM members who chose him to be chair. Only thing left to do is adjust your expectations accordingly, otherwise you'll find yourself disappointed more often than not.


Well we don't all have to be doing all of the things.

We wanted Trebor as chair (and on the CSM) largely because he knows hugely more about interaction between CCP and the CSM than anyone else on the CSM does. I realise that "take my word for it" is a bit unsatisfying, but he really has been putting some effort into edumacating us in these respects.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
None ofthe Above
#24 - 2013-05-25 01:40:22 UTC
Malcanis wrote:


Well we don't all have to be doing all of the things.

We wanted Trebor as chair (and on the CSM) largely because he knows hugely more about interaction between CCP and the CSM than anyone else on the CSM does. I realise that "take my word for it" is a bit unsatisfying, but he really has been putting some effort into edumacating us in these respects.


Okay, out of curiosity -- not to attack, how does the chair help him do that?

Its great to hear that he's being successful at this aspect. I do feel like it was the right thing get him on CSM 8. I was a big supporter of Trebor during the election, but as you probably know I opposed him for chair. I didn't think that the role as chairperson helped him help CSM in this manner. He likes to call himself "fleet booster"; we all know fleet booster doesn't necessarily have to be FC. Really two different roles, and a person shouldn't do both unless they have both skillsets and capability.

If you wouldn't mind explaining I'd appreciate it, because I am still pretty confused about this aspect.

FYI - I also supported and still support CSM making its own decisions for the chair as well as the rest of the officers, but that doesn't mean it is none of our business. I think many of us are still confused about this and that effects how we relate to you folks.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#25 - 2013-05-25 02:54:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
None ofthe Above wrote:
Malcanis wrote:


Well we don't all have to be doing all of the things.

We wanted Trebor as chair (and on the CSM) largely because he knows hugely more about interaction between CCP and the CSM than anyone else on the CSM does. I realise that "take my word for it" is a bit unsatisfying, but he really has been putting some effort into edumacating us in these respects.


Okay, out of curiosity -- not to attack, how does the chair help him do that?

Its great to hear that he's being successful at this aspect. I do feel like it was the right thing get him on CSM 8. I was a big supporter of Trebor during the election, but as you probably know I opposed him for chair. I didn't think that the role as chairperson helped him help CSM in this manner. He likes to call himself "fleet booster"; we all know fleet booster doesn't necessarily have to be FC. Really two different roles, and a person shouldn't do both unless they have both skillsets and capability.

If you wouldn't mind explaining I'd appreciate it, because I am still pretty confused about this aspect.

FYI - I also supported and still support CSM making its own decisions for the chair as well as the rest of the officers, but that doesn't mean it is none of our business. I think many of us are still confused about this and that effects how we relate to you folks.



This is a legitimate question.

The first thing you have to realise is that, possibly in contrast to other CSMs I don't know, CSM8 is very collaborative. We're really all very much on the same page, there's not a whole lot of rivalry or backbiting going on (this was a huge relief to me; I prefer such activities to be confined to the forums). We're all very happy to work together. As such there wasn't big ego-smash thing going on to grab perceived power. Only 2 or 3 of us even expressed an interest in the chairman's role in the sense of "I think I could do this well". I discluded myself right away (even during my campaign) because I'd be a terrible leader - I'm by nature an outsider and a nonconformist, and I don't really have the emotional insight into other people's thought processes that defines a good leader. It wouldn't be unreasonable to say that we picked Trebor as a comfort thing - this guy knows what he's doing, he has the process knowledge, let's make use of him to protect us from ******* up.

The pros and cons of who should do what were largely expressed in terms of what would benefit the CSM as an institution. What would drive increased voting, increased profile, increased awareness, make us more effective and so on. It was really remarkably selfless in a way one might not expect from EVE players.

There was also an element of "God damb, Trebor has put so much work into this, he's earned this recognition."

"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.
#26 - 2013-05-25 03:08:27 UTC
Actually looking back I see that I've answered a different question to the one you asked "how does being chair help him do that"

In a narrow technical sense it doesn't. We made Trebs chair for pretty much the reasons I outlined above. But insofar as being chair carries any weight at all, it's a signal to both the players and to CCP that CSM8 wants to build on what CSMs 1-7 have achieved - "If I have seen further it is by standing on ye sholders of Giants."

In day to day interactions between the CSM, and between CSM:CCP, the roles carry essentially zero authority. They confer no power; they are a statement of technical expertise and willingness to accept additional responsibility. Trebor has a huge amount of experience, and if something really drastic happens - and I'm not talking about minor kerfuffles like the new launcher which 99.8% of the players won't even remember after a week or two, we have the advantage of someone experienced in messaging and communicating with CCP as our front man.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
None ofthe Above
#27 - 2013-05-25 03:28:23 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Actually looking back I see that I've answered a different question to the one you asked "how does being chair help him do that"

In a narrow technical sense it doesn't. We made Trebs chair for pretty much the reasons I outlined above. But insofar as being chair carries any weight at all, it's a signal to both the players and to CCP that CSM8 wants to build on what CSMs 1-7 have achieved - "If I have seen further it is by standing on ye sholders of Giants."

In day to day interactions between the CSM, and between CSM:CCP, the roles carry essentially zero authority. They confer no power; they are a statement of technical expertise and willingness to accept additional responsibility. Trebor has a huge amount of experience, and if something really drastic happens - and I'm not talking about minor kerfuffles like the new launcher which 99.8% of the players won't even remember after a week or two, we have the advantage of someone experienced in messaging and communicating with CCP as our front man.


Not sure if you are right about the launcher, but otherwise I appreciate you explaining your perspective. I do agree that Trebor has put a lot into the CSM project, is a great asset to CSM8 and deserves recognition for that.

Even though I might be the first to call you out when I see something I am concerned about, really am pulling for a successful year for you guys.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#28 - 2013-05-25 03:37:32 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:


Not sure if you are right about the launcher...


Maybe not. Looking back, I realise it's something of an Olympian perspective, but having been involved in this crazy appalling addictive trainwreck of awesome for the last ~7 years, it really seems pretty minor. Christ there was that expansion, which one was it now? where no-one could log in for like 3 or 4 days.

Basically I'm much more concerned with game philosophy/balance issues than I am in ephemeral technical issues. That's partly becuase I have the technical expertise of a donut, but mostly because I care about things that are going to be a problem for years, not days. I care a hundred times more about the effect that making probing so much more powerful is going to have than I do about some launcher issues that I'm confident will be fixed by next weekend at the latest.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
dark heartt
#29 - 2013-05-25 11:05:42 UTC  |  Edited by: dark heartt
Malcanis wrote:
dark heartt wrote:
My big question is where the actual **** is Trebor?



Well about an hour ago he was in the meeting with the rest of us.


Oh I realise he would be doing thing's internally (I've defended the CSM on that a fair bit in the past), but I am not seeing any public communication from him (although I haven't looked in the last few days to be totally honest). His last post here on the forums was on the 21st regarding the radial menu and the post before that was on the 16th in the thread congratulating him for getting chairman. In a position based on communication, I would have expected him to be communicating a little more. Not a major issue yet, however it's not what I think the majority of the player base expected considering how many people ran with ~communication~ as their big ticket item.

Edit: Last post on his blog is dated the 21st as well. Last Twitter post 23rd about some random guy flying badly. I get his knowledge internally about the CSM is good, but his communication has been terrible at this early date. It's a good thing we have you and Ripard, Malc.

http://tetrisisunrealistic.blogspot.com.au/
June Ting
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#30 - 2013-05-25 12:18:34 UTC  |  Edited by: June Ting
From what I've seen, there have been two responses:

  • Non-programmers: WHY IS MY GAME BROKEN, WHY DIDN'T CCP PREDICT THIS WOULD HAPPEN?
  • Programmers: Oh thank god that wasn't my product, "minor change unexpectedly gone awry" could have been me just as easily. Good luck with fixing it, CCP!


I think anyone who's been responsible for writing software before understands that sometimes unintended side effects happen from changes that were intended to be minor and non-noteworthy in any way, and it seems to me that CCP has fixed the associated issues with people being unable to patch as swiftly as they could. In my real life, I'm responsible for ensuring availability of a very complex system that you almost certainly use every single day, and I can assure you that people yelling at me to fixitfixitfixitfixitfixitfixitfixitfixitfixitfixitfixit in no way makes the process of fixing it go faster. My pager has already gone off, I'm already working on it, and having people rage at me just slows me down.

It'd be kind of cool and useful if CCP released incident reports of why they had downtime and measures they've taken to mitigate, similar to Amazon ( http://aws.amazon.com/message/67457/ ) or Google ( http://static.googleusercontent.com/external_content/untrusted_dlcp/www.google.com/en/us/appsstatus/ir/plibxfjh8whr44h.pdf ) but fundamentally games don't have the same reliability expectation that business web services do, and it's a 'would be nice' rather than a 'I am not buying this product without this' kind of thing.

I'll leave you with http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYc05gZFly0 in summary.


Now, complaints about new UI and stuff are valid separate from complaining about downtime. Because product design is something that can be dealt with well in advance. But quit your complaining about 'zomg game broke'.

I fight for the freedom of my people.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#31 - 2013-05-27 09:48:08 UTC
dark heartt wrote:
In a position based on communication, I would have expected him to be communicating a little more. Not a major issue yet, however it's not what I think the majority of the player base expected considering how many people ran with ~communication~ as their big ticket item.


I think you need to review all the comments by CSM8 members about Trebor: he is communicating, but his communication is "inwards" facing, where CCP is "in" and we players are "out". I expect you'll see Jester, Malcanis and Ari doing more than enough outwards communication to make up for the attention you're not getting from Trebor.

You can't expect all the CSM to focus on communicating every small thing with the players all the time. They have to discuss things with themselves & CCP, figure out whether an issue is worth pursuing, play their own game, sort out their personal obligations such as paid jobs, family, housekeeping, etc, and then finally get down to communicating with the players.

There's been more communication out of CSM8 in this month than from the entire year of CSM7. Just consider that for a moment when you start complaining about CSM not communicating "enough". Jester has been on three (four?) podcasts, Malcanis has been on at least one podcast, Ali has been running "Space Hangouts" … about the only thing anyone can complain about is that Jester-the-robot-blogger seems to have stalled. Perhaps he's under load from the deluge of material to absorb from CSM7 and CCP? Just worth contemplating that for a moment.

As for the launcher issue? Let's wait and see what CCP does. I'm looking forward to a launcher aimed at making the launching of multiple clients easier than ISBoxer made it. In my case I'm only ever launching four clients at a time, but in my case that's across four computers, each of which is barely capable of running one client on its own.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#32 - 2013-05-27 09:58:38 UTC
June Ting wrote:
From what I've seen, there have been two responses:

  • Non-programmers: WHY IS MY GAME BROKEN, WHY DIDN'T CCP PREDICT THIS WOULD HAPPEN?
  • Programmers: Oh thank god that wasn't my product, "minor change unexpectedly gone awry" could have been me just as easily. Good luck with fixing it, CCP!


CCP Guard has told us that CCP are in general not happy with the release process, and that they know that they have let us down with lack of notification (or "warning" for want of a better word ;).

Expect that changes are coming, and have no doubt that the good folks in CSM8 are already talking to CCP about ensuring that all patches have a week's notice unless they are required for putting out fires and stopping servers/game economy from melting. We can't queue a long skill to train unless we have at least two or three day's warning, after all.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#33 - 2013-05-27 11:22:35 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
We can't queue a long skill to train unless we have at least two or three day's warning, after all.



This is a legit comment.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
None ofthe Above
#34 - 2013-05-27 14:46:40 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
dark heartt wrote:
In a position based on communication, I would have expected him to be communicating a little more. Not a major issue yet, however it's not what I think the majority of the player base expected considering how many people ran with ~communication~ as their big ticket item.


I think you need to review all the comments by CSM8 members about Trebor: he is communicating, but his communication is "inwards" facing, where CCP is "in" and we players are "out". I expect you'll see Jester, Malcanis and Ari doing more than enough outwards communication to make up for the attention you're not getting from Trebor.

You can't expect all the CSM to focus on communicating every small thing with the players all the time. They have to discuss things with themselves & CCP, figure out whether an issue is worth pursuing, play their own game, sort out their personal obligations such as paid jobs, family, housekeeping, etc, and then finally get down to communicating with the players.

There's been more communication out of CSM8 in this month than from the entire year of CSM7. Just consider that for a moment when you start complaining about CSM not communicating "enough". Jester has been on three (four?) podcasts, Malcanis has been on at least one podcast, Ali has been running "Space Hangouts" … about the only thing anyone can complain about is that Jester-the-robot-blogger seems to have stalled. Perhaps he's under load from the deluge of material to absorb from CSM7 and CCP? Just worth contemplating that for a moment.

As for the launcher issue? Let's wait and see what CCP does. I'm looking forward to a launcher aimed at making the launching of multiple clients easier than ISBoxer made it. In my case I'm only ever launching four clients at a time, but in my case that's across four computers, each of which is barely capable of running one client on its own.


I think you are largely right here.

I was listening to Crossing Zebra's interview with Ripard and Malc, and noted one very odd thing: Ripard referred to Trebor's position as Chair as outward facing, and his own as inward. In practice we are seeing the opposite. Early days though. We'll see what the future brings us.

I'd give CSM 8 very high marks for a start, but that brought the few days of this "crisis" into stark contrast. It's been getting better though. Perhaps my pokie-stick of a thread here had a positive result? Or maybe they would have pulled it together regardless.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#35 - 2013-05-27 16:27:10 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:
Perhaps my pokie-stick of a thread here had a positive result?


I can truthfully say that this thread was flagged up in the CSM8 channel.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#36 - 2013-05-27 17:56:59 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:
I was listening to Crossing Zebra's interview with Ripard and Malc, and noted one very odd thing: Ripard referred to Trebor's position as Chair as outward facing, and his own as inward. In practice we are seeing the opposite. Early days though. We'll see what the future brings us.


Well, you're both right. It just depends on which way you & Ripard consider "out" versus "in" Lol

If Ripard considers CSM to be a body representing the players to CCP, then "out" would be "from the players to CCP" while "in" would be "from CCP to the players." In your case, I suspect that you consider yourself to be an audience for CSM rather than the body that CSM represents, so you interpret "out" to be "towards the players" and "in" to be "towards CCP".

So just like Obi Wan explaining to Luke that Darth Vader did kill his father, I'll point out to you that it's just a matter of your point of view!

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Revman Zim
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#37 - 2013-05-27 18:25:28 UTC
Well... I will throw my worthless 2 cents in.

This whole issue is VERY minor.

The fact that CCP was immediately working a solution, communicating to the player base, and threw in 50k SP to all players (even those that had no idea there was a problem) shows the change they have had from a few years ago.

I seem to remember a patch that put EVE on its ass for several days. So let's try and keep this in perspective.

For all those bashing the new CSM. You are directing your frustration at the one entity that was completely out of the loop and unable to fix anything with this problem. So quit shooting arrows at the wrong target. And of course you have the past CSM members stirring the pot for the lulz.

TL;DR?

Turn off your computer, climb out of your parents basement, shave the neck beard and go get some sun. Problem will be fixed before you find the aloe for your sunburn.
None ofthe Above
#38 - 2013-05-27 19:03:00 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
None ofthe Above wrote:
I was listening to Crossing Zebra's interview with Ripard and Malc, and noted one very odd thing: Ripard referred to Trebor's position as Chair as outward facing, and his own as inward. In practice we are seeing the opposite. Early days though. We'll see what the future brings us.


Well, you're both right. It just depends on which way you & Ripard consider "out" versus "in" Lol

If Ripard considers CSM to be a body representing the players to CCP, then "out" would be "from the players to CCP" while "in" would be "from CCP to the players." In your case, I suspect that you consider yourself to be an audience for CSM rather than the body that CSM represents, so you interpret "out" to be "towards the players" and "in" to be "towards CCP".

So just like Obi Wan explaining to Luke that Darth Vader did kill his father, I'll point out to you that it's just a matter of your point of view!


Discussion of innies and outies is starting to look like navel gazing. :P

Ripard specifically went on to talk about it. Inward meant inward to the CSM, described himself as "whip" which followers of American politics would understand.

Outward would mean towards CCP and/or the playerbase. I gather Trebor's doing well with CCP, as expected. Ripard has stepped up were Trebor hasn't, and talked to the playerbase. So no major complaint here, just an observation.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
dark heartt
#39 - 2013-05-27 23:40:05 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
dark heartt wrote:
In a position based on communication, I would have expected him to be communicating a little more. Not a major issue yet, however it's not what I think the majority of the player base expected considering how many people ran with ~communication~ as their big ticket item.


I think you need to review all the comments by CSM8 members about Trebor: he is communicating, but his communication is "inwards" facing, where CCP is "in" and we players are "out". I expect you'll see Jester, Malcanis and Ari doing more than enough outwards communication to make up for the attention you're not getting from Trebor.

You can't expect all the CSM to focus on communicating every small thing with the players all the time. They have to discuss things with themselves & CCP, figure out whether an issue is worth pursuing, play their own game, sort out their personal obligations such as paid jobs, family, housekeeping, etc, and then finally get down to communicating with the players.

There's been more communication out of CSM8 in this month than from the entire year of CSM7. Just consider that for a moment when you start complaining about CSM not communicating "enough". Jester has been on three (four?) podcasts, Malcanis has been on at least one podcast, Ali has been running "Space Hangouts" … about the only thing anyone can complain about is that Jester-the-robot-blogger seems to have stalled. Perhaps he's under load from the deluge of material to absorb from CSM7 and CCP? Just worth contemplating that for a moment.

As for the launcher issue? Let's wait and see what CCP does. I'm looking forward to a launcher aimed at making the launching of multiple clients easier than ISBoxer made it. In my case I'm only ever launching four clients at a time, but in my case that's across four computers, each of which is barely capable of running one client on its own.


I distinctly remember saying that it was only Trebor I said wasn't communicating enough. I actually complemented Ripard and Malcanis for their communication. Like I said before, I know it's early days, I just hope that this isn't indicative of Trebors communication to the playerbase in the future. Although if Ripard keeps his blogging up, perhaps we don't need Trebor to communicate as much allowing him to focus on the CCP communication.

At this point it's just my theory and not overly important. How the CSM handles a real problem will show us a little more.

http://tetrisisunrealistic.blogspot.com.au/
None ofthe Above
#40 - 2013-05-30 02:13:03 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
None ofthe Above wrote:
Perhaps my pokie-stick of a thread here had a positive result?


I can truthfully say that this thread was flagged up in the CSM8 channel.


I am sure there were a few NSFW curses thrown in my direction on that thread. Oh well, that would be fair enough.

Thanks CSM 8 for weathering the slings and arrows, and largely taking the criticism in stride.

Hopefully this was constructive and helped channel efforts and perhaps support any arguments made to CCP. Things did appear to get significantly better as time went on.

If any of you would like to take issue with my approach (more than you've already done), feel free to here or in evemail. I hope none of you took any of this personally. I am a big supporter of the CSM but feel the need to call'em like I see'em, in order for us to get maximum benefit of this arrangement.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Previous page123Next page