These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CSM Statement on the SOMER Promotion (with reply from CCP Pokethulu)

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#101 - 2013-09-28 21:38:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Doc Fury
mynnna wrote:

Okay, let me answer the context of your post.

No, I do not see a trend developing here. I happen to believe that both here and with the TOS issue, there were reasons other than "We know we won't like the CSM's answer so we're going to just ignore them."


O.K. but CCP's motivation for leaving out the CSM is not at issue. They did it. They keep doing it. You omitted what I did say again for whatever reason or maybe you just don't feel comfortable addressing it. Re-quoted again:

Doc Fury wrote:

I would remind you the reason the CSM was created (the reason given to the NY Times) was to help prevent T20-type malfeasance from happening again (via oversight) and to provide transparency to the players regarding what CCP is up to. This has yet to work as advertised. Do we really need a "representative body" that are treated as irrelevant by the organization that created it?


I would change the above to read: "regularly treated as irrelevant". As I also previously said a trend seems to be developing. What I and others are seeing is that in this, and past situations the CSM does not seem to become very relevant to CCP until after there is blowback for things they should have been involved in. This really flies in the face of its purpose. Perception is everything, and eventually people stop believing "doh our bad" when it keeps on happening.

I continue to ask what the CSM's purpose is exactly because I no longer think it is what it was sold to us to be anymore. What you guys contribute to expansions and similar is not trivial by any means, I don't want to give that impression.

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
Sid Hudgens
Doomheim
#102 - 2013-09-28 21:43:14 UTC
Quote:
I had you pinned as an apologist during ToS-gate, but this post just confirms it for me.


Uh... ok...

Congratulations I guess.


Quote:
I think it's kind of cute how you think you know something about running a business.


Very weak troll. 1/10. Try harder next time.


Best regards,

Sid Hudgens
Apologist (for something ... or someone ... I guess.)

"....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced."
Johnny Marzetti
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#103 - 2013-09-28 21:48:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Johnny Marzetti
Sid Hudgens wrote:


Quote:
I think it's kind of cute how you think you know something about running a business.


Very weak troll. 1/10. Try harder next time.


Obviously I needed to spell it out for you: From your post, it is obvious that you know nothing about running a business, especially a business that depends on subscriptions, and this is something I know a bit about, having actually done it myself, and you are making yourself look pretty ridiculous to anyone who actually knows anything about the matter at hand. I hope that helps guide your posting in the future, but if not, I am sure I will continue to find it as amusing as I do now.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#104 - 2013-09-28 22:00:40 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
Alt Two wrote:
mynnna wrote:
I also don't see how we're a "PR stunt" in this when we're as opposed to this as the rest of the playerbase is. Can you explain that to me? "PR Stunt" usually implies a desire to get good PR, and I'm at a loss for how "elected player advisory council created to serve, amongst other things, as a sounding board for developer ideas was ignored, is now publicly opposing something" is good PR.

If by "we're as opposed to this as the rest of the playerbase is" you mean "we don't care" then sure you are. I've spoken to one of you and he was completely happy just having the magnate and vexor switched out.


Yes we're a collective hive mind and the private opinion of any one council member are in fact the collective opinions of the CSM as a whole.



Doc Fury wrote:

I would change the above to read: "regularly treated as irrelevant". As I also previously said a trend seems to be developing. What I and others are seeing is that in this, and past situations the CSM does not seem to become very relevant to CCP until after there is blowback for things they should have been involved in. This really flies in the face of its purpose. Perception is everything, and eventually people stop believing "doh our bad" when it keeps on happening.

I continue to ask what the CSM's purpose is exactly because I no longer think it is what it was sold to us to be anymore.


I'm sorry that a handful of times when, for one reason or another, the CSM has not been consulted on a change that has later blown up into controversy have (for obvious reasons) overshadowed the times when the CSM has not been consulted and things have gone swimmingly, or the times when the CSM has been consulted and the end result were changes that were reshaped to be acceptable to the community or pulled entirely.

I'm not really sure what I can do or say to change that perception. Will swearing up and down that I feel anything but "treated as irrelevant" do the trick? If so, consider it done - it's certainly true. If not, I'm not really sure what else I could do, short of getting permission to release all kinds of NDA'd conversations or something.

Doc Fury wrote:
What you guys contribute to expansions and similar is not trivial by any means, I don't want to give that impression.


Yeah, too late. After all, perception is everything.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Prince Kobol
#105 - 2013-09-28 22:03:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Prince Kobol
mynnna wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Kuni Oichi wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Reyna Snoo wrote:
I imagine CCP is kinda confused as this isn't the first time they've given prizes to Somer to give away. For Somer's one quadrillion celebration CCP gave them 4 Collectors Editions and some Ishukone Watch Scorpions to give away using this same giveaway mechanic and nobody seemed to care about it then. Is it the large in-game value that makes this different?


Simply.. the goons didn't care :)

The only reason there has been such a storm is because the goons didn't like it this time round.


So you're saying that we do a better job of raising awareness of concerning issues to the rest of the playerbase than anyone else?

Thanks for the compliment, it's nice to know our efforts are so appreciated.



My pleasure, yet it still remains true.

Why didn't the goons go a forum spurge during the Q1 Celebrations?

What makes this time different from when CCP were giving away 4 Collectors Edition and Ishukone Watch Scorpions using the exactly same method?


Comparatively speaking, the magnitude of the prizes. A few CEs and a handful of IWS is a far cry from several guardian vexors and a couple of frigates that are literally priceless.

Realistically speaking, nothing, although I'd be of the opinion that the prizes in question would be far more in line with the magnitude of things that CCP should hand out through this community engagement thing. That is, of course, provided that the policy David said they'd be writing allows the player or player group receiving the prizes to materially benefit from their distribution, which I'm pretty sure I'd be against.

Practically speaking, while I can't speak for other goons, I very rarely play Blink at all and didn't even know they were giving away CEs and IWS during the Q1 celebrations until it was brought up again more recently.



So just to Clarify the CSM position, it is not that CCP have been working with Somerblink to give away prizes, but it is the nature of the prizes where the problem lies?
Sid Hudgens
Doomheim
#106 - 2013-09-28 22:12:05 UTC
Johnny Marzetti wrote:
Sid Hudgens wrote:


Quote:
I think it's kind of cute how you think you know something about running a business.


Very weak troll. 1/10. Try harder next time.


Obviously I needed to spell it out for you: From your post, it is obvious that you know nothing about running a business, especially a business that depends on subscriptions, and this is something I know a bit about, having actually done it myself, and you are making yourself look pretty ridiculous to anyone who actually knows anything about the matter at hand. I hope that helps guide your posting in the future, but if not, I am sure I will continue to find it as amusing as I do now.


I'm terribly sorry (I am an apologist, after all.) I didn't realize I was talking to such a subscription business expert. Does CCP know about you? They should really be consulting you on their business practices. I mean, you've "acutally done it myself" so you're sure to know more about it than a company that's been running a successful subscription game for ten years.

Well since you're here maybe you could clear some things up with your vast expertise? For instance...

If you have on one hand hundreds of players having a little extra fun participating in a give-away contest and on the other hand a dozen or so buttmad forum trolls who will complain no matter what you do ... which of those groups would you cater to?

"....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced."
Tao Dolcino
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#107 - 2013-09-28 22:13:00 UTC
CSM, or should i say GoonCSM, if you were really as concerned as you say in the first post, then why the hell are you satisfied with the answer from CCP which is a slap in our faces, and yours ?
That's where i doubt greatly of your utility/representativity.
Jane Schereau
#108 - 2013-09-28 22:15:20 UTC
My hat is off to the CSM. You fellas truly represent us; thank you for your involvement in this issue.
Johnny Marzetti
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#109 - 2013-09-28 22:16:10 UTC
Sid Hudgens wrote:


I'm terribly sorry (I am an apologist, after all.) I didn't realize I was talking to such a subscription business expert. Does CCP know about you? They should really be consulting you on their business practices. I mean, you've "acutally done it myself" so you're sure to know more about it than a company that's been running a successful subscription game for ten years.

Well since you're here maybe you could clear some things up with your vast expertise? For instance...

If you have on one hand hundreds of players having a little extra fun participating in a give-away contest and on the other hand a dozen or so buttmad forum trolls who will complain no matter what you do ... which of those groups would you cater to?


I don't consult for free, buddy.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#110 - 2013-09-28 22:17:06 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:


So just to Clarify the CSM position, it is not that CCP have been working with Somerblink to give away prizes, but it is the nature of the prizes where the problem lies?

Let's try a bit harder to read the post and not skip over the part where I said I didn't really think handouts like this should materially benefit the organization they're given to to distribute, shall we?

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#111 - 2013-09-28 22:18:54 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Alt Two wrote:
mynnna wrote:
I also don't see how we're a "PR stunt" in this when we're as opposed to this as the rest of the playerbase is. Can you explain that to me? "PR Stunt" usually implies a desire to get good PR, and I'm at a loss for how "elected player advisory council created to serve, amongst other things, as a sounding board for developer ideas was ignored, is now publicly opposing something" is good PR.

If by "we're as opposed to this as the rest of the playerbase is" you mean "we don't care" then sure you are. I've spoken to one of you and he was completely happy just having the magnate and vexor switched out.


Yes we're a collective hive mind and the private opinion of any one council member are in fact the collective opinions of the CSM as a whole.



Doc Fury wrote:

I would change the above to read: "regularly treated as irrelevant". As I also previously said a trend seems to be developing. What I and others are seeing is that in this, and past situations the CSM does not seem to become very relevant to CCP until after there is blowback for things they should have been involved in. This really flies in the face of its purpose. Perception is everything, and eventually people stop believing "doh our bad" when it keeps on happening.

I continue to ask what the CSM's purpose is exactly because I no longer think it is what it was sold to us to be anymore.


I'm sorry that a handful of times when, for one reason or another, the CSM has not been consulted on a change that has later blown up into controversy have (for obvious reasons) overshadowed the times when the CSM has not been consulted and things have gone swimmingly, or the times when the CSM has been consulted and the end result were changes that were reshaped to be acceptable to the community or pulled entirely.

I'm not really sure what I can do or say to change that perception. Will swearing up and down that I feel anything but "treated as irrelevant" do the trick? If so, consider it done - it's certainly true. If not, I'm not really sure what else I could do, short of getting permission to release all kinds of NDA'd conversations or something.

Doc Fury wrote:
What you guys contribute to expansions and similar is not trivial by any means, I don't want to give that impression.


Yeah, too late. After all, perception is everything.


So, what's the purpose of the CSM exactly?

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#112 - 2013-09-28 22:45:43 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
Doc Fury wrote:
So, what's the purpose of the CSM exactly?


Quote:
Since the opening of Tranquility, EVE players have had an indirect say in how their virtual society is run. While player feedback has been central to the game’s evolution, this enabler relied upon the discretion of CCP to derive generalizations about society issues and player concerns. With the population of EVE exceeding 390.000 individuals, the time has come to empower players with a formal communications channel to directly impact the development of their society. The means of accomplishing this goal will be through the implementation of a modified version of “deliberative representative democracy” in EVE.
Contents

1 The Scope of the CSM
2 Community Elections for Player Representatives
3 Summary of Representative Responsibilities
4 Candidate Eligibility
5 The Election Process
6 Term Length and Duration of the CSM
7 Topic Presentation and Management by the CSM

The Scope of the CSM

The purpose of the CSM is to represent society interests to CCP. This requires active engagement with the player community to master EVE issue awareness, understanding, and evaluation in the context of the “greatest good for the greater player base”. The scope of issues is restricted only to EVE, its ongoing development, and limited meta (out-of-game) issues which have direct relevance to the EVE universe. It is important to keep in mind that the CSM will not have formal powers within CCP, they will have a voice inside CCP.
Community Elections for Player Representatives

A council of fourteen player Representatives will be democratically elected by EVE players. The CSM will be headed by Officers; a Chairman, a Vice-Chairman, Secretary, and Vice-Secretary. This group is responsible for managing the operations of the council.

Each Officer will be elected by the council with an internal vote. If there are two candidates for a position, the winner is determined by a simple majority vote; if there are multiple candidates, then multiple ballots are cast, with each ballot eliminating the candidate with the least number of votes. In the event of a tie between any two candidates, the representative who was elected to the CSM with the highest ranking from the election will cast the tie-breaking vote.
Summary of Representative Responsibilities

The CSM is a “flat” organization, and Officers do not have special powers, only additional responsibilities. The responsibilities of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman are to handle official communications between the CSM and CCP, and they are expected to be particularly active in interacting with the community. The responsibilities of the Secretary and Vice-Secretary are related to the production of official CSM publications such as the CSM Summit Minutes. Thus, CSM Officers are expected to be the most active members of the CSM. Alternates are not part of the council structure; fourteen members are elected to the council and if a member, for whatever reason, is unable to serve on the council, it will carry on without a replacement member.
Candidate Eligibility

Anyone who has held an EVE Online account for more than sixty (60) days is eligible to campaign for a representative seat on the CSM, with the following exceptions: employees, volunteers, interns, affiliates, strategic partners, employees of other gaming companies/games and family members of CCP are all ineligible. Elected members of the CSM must maintain their eligibility during their term in order to remain on the council.

Also, players with a serious warning or ban on any account in their possession can be excluded from candidate eligibility. However, in-game behavior or public opinions, regardless of play style, will never be a criterion for candidacy unless the rules of the EULA and/or TOS are violated.

All candidates must verify their identity to CCP before they can officially be acknowledged as a candidate. All candidates must to be 21 years old or older in order to qualify as a candidate and have to hold a valid passport at the date of the candidacy evaluation that allows for international travel and admission to Iceland and participation on the CSM. Because election winners will ultimately make appearances on EVE-TV, EON or other media, candidates must run under their real-life names, and may either create a new character or use an existing account name to give themselves an in-game identity.
Please note: Icelandic citizens are only required to submit a driver’s license or other valid photo ID. All candidates have to be able to travel to Iceland; CCP will not arrange any permits to enter the country should visa or similar be required.

Warnings for serious EVE-related misconduct might bar the person from running for candidacy.


I'd quote the rest of it but I'm out of characters. Sad

Snark aside, I've said already that I feel anything but irrelevant or ignored. I'm sorry you disagree, but my perception at this point is that that your perception isn't going to change, either because you really do care that much, or you're because you're just trolling and I've been biting far too long. Either way, my perception is that there's little use in me carrying on this line of conversation with you anymore.

Naturally, my perception could be changed; you're welcome to try.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Prince Kobol
#113 - 2013-09-28 22:48:45 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:


So just to Clarify the CSM position, it is not that CCP have been working with Somerblink to give away prizes, but it is the nature of the prizes where the problem lies?

Let's try a bit harder to read the post and not skip over the part where I said I didn't really think handouts like this should materially benefit the organization they're given to to distribute, shall we?


So where the complaints or forums post from the CSM for the previous prizes given away, unless you are saying that none of the CSM were aware of the prizes for the Q1 Celebrations?
Large Collidable Object
morons.
#114 - 2013-09-28 22:50:25 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:

Large Collidable Object wrote:
It's astonishing how CCP Pokethulu manages to completely ignore most of the specific points that were risen whilst only vaguely touching subjects 2 and 4 without even hinting at any intention do mitigate the damage that has been done.

In all fairness, he replied within 12 hours of getting our statement -- on a Friday. I think it will be interesting to see what happens next week.



So how does this make the reply any better? Yes - Most likely he wasn't authorized to say more and I don't blame him personally at all, but the reply as such ignores most concerns risen in the original question.

As I stated in my earlier post, this is T20 revisited - just completely official and unconcealed this time around, just worse.

Yes - I know - the old ships wont be resurrected, but at least BoB wasn't running a third person gambling site requiring OOG registration, wasn't as openly involved in RMT, and they only received a BPO that was already in the games database.

That self-serving gambling site now receives completely newly created items that are more scarce and valuable than AT prices for sharing some of the returns to get some guys drunk in Vegas.

I will not register at Somer Blink (calling it a boycott would be pretentious as I never indulged in gambling) , but in case the person winning this ship has the slightest bit of respect for the game, he will self dectruct it upon arrival - at least that's what I would do.
You know... [morons.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gjOx65yD5A)
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#115 - 2013-09-28 23:06:11 UTC
mynnna wrote:

I'd quote the rest of it but I'm out of characters. Sad


Just the link would have sufficed if you were just going to quote the Wiki.

In re: perceptions. All I would expect you to do even if you don't yourself feel irrelevant is to convey to CCP it is being perceived that way. Like I said earlier, I don't blame the CSM for this. It's CCP that seems to be returning to their old ways. Claiming Ignorance on CCPs part is hardly passable any longer given they have 10 years of experience in dealing with what will and won't cause a riot, and a group of players dedicated (and elected) to help them NOT do stupid things like this.

I also agree in re: accomplishments can be overshadowed by a few bad events like these. The biggest problem I have with it is this seems to be an increasing problem, and not one that is diminishing.

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#116 - 2013-09-28 23:20:49 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
Doc Fury wrote:
All I would expect you to do even if you don't yourself feel irrelevant is to convey to CCP it is being perceived that way.



You'd have saved us both a lot of time and effort if you'd said this up front. P

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Deka Ekato
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#117 - 2013-09-28 23:25:23 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
During those meetings, we outlined five areas of concern that we felt CCP's response should address. These were:

1. Reintroduction of historically important or unique ships.

2. Favoring one community fan site over others.

3. Trusting a community fan site, and more particularly, a player, with the task of selecting the winners.

4. Forcing players to use SOMER Blink in order to enter -- which may have legal consequences in some jurisdictions.

5. Providing direct benefit to a for-profit gambling fansite.

CCP Navigator's announcement on Thursday of changes to the prize structure has addressed (1), and details of the method of selecting winners (which we urge CCP to make public) leaves the CSM reasonably confident that the actual drawing will be fair, addressing issue (3).

Issues (2) and (5) are business decisions that CCP has the right to make. We think they are a mistake, and hope that the uproar over this issue will cause CCP to re-evaluate these policies for future promotions. Supporting groups that have a clear educational/public service focus in-game is one thing; supporting a group that is distinctly for-profit -- and one that can use the ISK it generates to secretly support in-game groups -- breeds distrust for CCP in the community.


Dear CSM / CCP,

Points 2 and 5 might be business decisions, but they are not simply "mistakes", they are absolutely unfair, biased and wrong.

It seems that this favouritism towards SB isn't the first time it has occured. ( If I had known about that, I would have voiced my concern back then ). It is this favouritism which is the major concern of this whole issue.

Isn't there some conflict of intereast with CCP dealing with SB, considering there are some/one people who were associated with SB who are now CCP employees.

And how does it work that, SB is sponsering the 2013 LV meeting ? Where is that financial support coming from ?

This whole favouritism issue stinks of corruption, and it should/must stop.

CCP please fix things.
Baron vonDoom
Scorn.
#118 - 2013-09-28 23:25:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Baron vonDoom
Doc Fury wrote:


In re: perceptions. All I would expect you to do even if you don't yourself feel irrelevant is to convey to CCP it is being perceived that way. Like I said earlier, I don't blame the CSM for this. It's CCP that seems to be returning to their old ways. Claiming Ignorance on CCPs part is hardly passable any longer given they have 10 years of experience in dealing with what will and won't cause a riot, and a group of players dedicated (and elected) to help them NOT do stupid things like this.

I also agree in re: accomplishments can be overshadowed by a few bad events like these. The biggest problem I have with it is this seems to be an increasing problem, and not one that is diminishing.




The CSM is not to blame - as you noted, they were introduced to prevent situations like these.

Obviosuly, CCP realized the CSM would dissuade CCP from doing what they did, so they decided not to ask in the first place.

A fine opportunity for the current CSM to show they enforce players interest instead of just acting as a new eden analog of chearleaders and kapos.

It's kind of sad really - actual eve devs are trying to keep the game alive and then some guy from marketing witthout the slightest clue about the nature of the game except its revenue and no clue about the functions keeping it alive goes rampant.

In Biology, that's called Cancer.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#119 - 2013-09-28 23:31:38 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
So where the complaints or forums post from the CSM for the previous prizes given away, unless you are saying that none of the CSM were aware of the prizes for the Q1 Celebrations?


so this clearly anything but a "developing program" considering that CCP has previously given things to somer blink with no strings attached under the assumption that they'd give them away to people on their site

i'm not sure what you're getting at, other than telling everybody that CCP are lying to the playerbase through their teeth, again, and presenting more evidence of CCP's favoritism towards one particular player

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#120 - 2013-09-28 23:35:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Varius Xeral
After this issue and ToSgate have been resolved/swept under the rug, I think there should be a discussion about what these two issues signify for the current state of CCP, the CSM, and the community. I am not happy that this stuff keeps happening, I am not happy that the CSM keeps getting ignored, I am not happy that we have to go through the tired process of forum rabble-rousing before the productive discourse begins, and I'm not happy that these issues will likely not be resolved to the communities' satisfaction when they're over. That said, shitting on the CSM every step of the way does nothing but frustrate them and alienate them from the community that they are trying to represent, aside from the one(s) that are just angling for later jobs at CCP (no name(s)).

As soon as these issues calm down, we as the community should work with the CSM and support them in an effort to argue for more use of the CSM as a preventative tool, and a more efficient use of them when issues arise instead of waiting for a shitstorm to brew first.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal