These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#201 - 2013-10-01 14:33:03 UTC
Tao Dolcino wrote:


Damn, you're right.
In fact what is annoying me the most with the CSM is that they claim to do a lot of things for us which they don't have the right to tell us about.
It's maybe true, but in a normal democracy, the ones who are supposed to represent you (the CSM is supposed to represent us, right ?) have the duty to report to us what they do. They are accountable for what they do in our name.
I don't have to believe them, i have the right to read transparent and complete reports.


You're serious, aren't you?

8 seasons of working to build trust with CCP to the point that we are allowed to see things that warrant an NDA. And you would have us throw away that trust by being 'open and transparent'. Representation is more than being spies to what is coming next. It is telling CCP what will happen if they do this or that. It is bringing concerns of the players to CCP.

We are not your reporters or your pipeline to the 3 or 5 year plans.

I signed an NDA and i have seen things, heard things, that give reason for that document.

m

btw if you think any democracy is totally transparent you live in a utopia far beyond any way for me to reach you with an argument based on rational thought

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#202 - 2013-10-01 15:01:14 UTC
Or that the CSM represent some sort of sovereign democratic power of the playerbase. Get a grip, guys.

We have a channel beyond the usual market action of not purchasing products we don't want. Nothing more. Learn to engage with it effectively, or lose it.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#203 - 2013-10-01 15:45:54 UTC  |  Edited by: KIller Wabbit
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
arabella blood wrote:
Tao Dolcino wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
You're assuming, of course, that the CSM have actually been given any answers or further information

considering they were deliberately cut out of this at the start, I wouldn't be surprised if they've only got a few worthless tidbits that don't address any issues


Damn, you're right.
In fact what is annoying me the most with the CSM is that they claim to do a lot of things for us which they don't have the right to tell us about.
It's maybe true, but in a normal democracy, the ones who are supposed to represent you (the CSM is supposed to represent us, right ?) have the duty to report to us what they do. They are accountable for what they do in our name.
I don't have to believe them, i have the right to read transparent and complete reports.


As i said in my previous post here. Hiding behind the NDA and doing nothing is basicly what the CSM is all about.


You can't really blame the CSM themselves for that. CCP are the ones who write up these NDAs. It's fun to say "hey players, heres a group of people who represent you and who we talk to" - great pr, for sure. But then when you legally gag those representatives and deliberately cut them out of conversations, it makes them pointless


Agreed. When many parties of CCP simply refusing to take one minute to ping an idea off of the CSM there's not anything the CSM can do. With the apparent ongoing lack of consequences for putting CCP in the crapper with its customers there is zero incentive for those parties to make the effort.

I have been wondering if there is a required reading lore kit for CCP employees. With so much of EVE leveraged on its lore - you'd think it would be as much of a required reading as the employee handbook.

(and please Lord forgive me this trespass for defending the CSM)
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#204 - 2013-10-01 15:51:05 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Tao Dolcino wrote:


Damn, you're right.
In fact what is annoying me the most with the CSM is that they claim to do a lot of things for us which they don't have the right to tell us about.
It's maybe true, but in a normal democracy, the ones who are supposed to represent you (the CSM is supposed to represent us, right ?) have the duty to report to us what they do. They are accountable for what they do in our name.
I don't have to believe them, i have the right to read transparent and complete reports.


You're serious, aren't you?

8 seasons of working to build trust with CCP to the point that we are allowed to see things that warrant an NDA. And you would have us throw away that trust by being 'open and transparent'. Representation is more than being spies to what is coming next. It is telling CCP what will happen if they do this or that. It is bringing concerns of the players to CCP.

We are not your reporters or your pipeline to the 3 or 5 year plans.

I signed an NDA and i have seen things, heard things, that give reason for that document.

m

btw if you think any democracy is totally transparent you live in a utopia far beyond any way for me to reach you with an argument based on rational thought


You could easily take credit without breaking a NDA. "Log 01/10/13 3 consultations with UI team on new ideas. Shot down 1 of them, suggested improvements for 1, agreed with 1, spawned off 2 new ideas during consult. Marketing - rejected 3 bad ideas, agreed to think about revised travel plans. CCP General - two more departments have opened up dedicated Skype channels and established consult schedule"
Xeen Du'Wang
Perkone
Caldari State
#205 - 2013-10-01 16:01:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Xeen Du'Wang
Mike Azariah wrote:
Tao Dolcino wrote:


Damn, you're right.
In fact what is annoying me the most with the CSM is that they claim to do a lot of things for us which they don't have the right to tell us about.
It's maybe true, but in a normal democracy, the ones who are supposed to represent you (the CSM is supposed to represent us, right ?) have the duty to report to us what they do. They are accountable for what they do in our name.
I don't have to believe them, i have the right to read transparent and complete reports.


You're serious, aren't you?

8 seasons of working to build trust with CCP to the point that we are allowed to see things that warrant an NDA. And you would have us throw away that trust by being 'open and transparent'. Representation is more than being spies to what is coming next. It is telling CCP what will happen if they do this or that. It is bringing concerns of the players to CCP.

We are not your reporters or your pipeline to the 3 or 5 year plans.

I signed an NDA and i have seen things, heard things, that give reason for that document.

m

btw if you think any democracy is totally transparent you live in a utopia far beyond any way for me to reach you with an argument based on rational thought


Please then, tell us why CCP thinks its okay to support a player based organization with huge profit potentials. Dont they think that is giving them an advantage? Or do they not care?

As a side note: I do not care about the trips to Vegas, other then the fact they allowed a Player group to profit in game from it.
Tao Dolcino
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#206 - 2013-10-01 16:18:13 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
8 seasons of working to build trust with CCP to the point that we are allowed to see things that warrant an NDA. And you would have us throw away that trust by being 'open and transparent'.


At least things are clear, so for you the role of the CSM is to earn the trust of CCP ???
Ahem, excuse me but the CSM has been create to restore the trust the players have lost in CCP... by more transparency...
Absolutely hopeless Roll
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#207 - 2013-10-01 20:15:14 UTC
Tao Dolcino wrote:
Ahem, excuse me but the CSM has been create to restore the trust the players have lost in CCP... by more transparency...
Absolutely hopeless Roll

Allow me to explain how this works.

CCP tells us a lot of things about any particular topic, like the current controversy. These broadly fit into three categories:

1) Things that are covered under the NDA. We can't talk about those. If we did, we'd blow years of patient work getting CCP to trust us and tell us all sorts of NDA stuff. It is very much in your interests that CCP continue to do so.

2) Things that are not covered by the NDA, which we talk about ad-nauseum.

3) Things that are not covered by the letter of the NDA, but we don't talk about them because we don't think it is in the best interests of the community to make them public.

With respect to (3), no doubt you are thinking "You arrogant bastards, who gave you the right to decide what's in our best interests to know or not know?". Well, you did. You elected us to make those decisions.

If you don't like the calls we are making, toss us out on our asses in the next election.

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Liam Todd Bloodstar
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#208 - 2013-10-01 20:37:56 UTC
I agree with the NDA stuff and etc etc...

My question is, has CCP been told that they are repeating old disasters that brought the CEO out to apologize to the players?

I dont have a massive number of accounts, and Eve will not notice me leave, but I am thinking about it....
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#209 - 2013-10-02 04:39:12 UTC
So the event is over and all prizes have been paid out.
Good job CCP. Good to see you sitting on your hands and letting things play out instead of doing what's right.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#210 - 2013-10-02 09:37:41 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Tao Dolcino wrote:
Ahem, excuse me but the CSM has been create to restore the trust the players have lost in CCP... by more transparency...
Absolutely hopeless Roll

Allow me to explain how this works.

CCP tells us a lot of things about any particular topic, like the current controversy. These broadly fit into three categories:

1) Things that are covered under the NDA. We can't talk about those. If we did, we'd blow years of patient work getting CCP to trust us and tell us all sorts of NDA stuff. It is very much in your interests that CCP continue to do so.

2) Things that are not covered by the NDA, which we talk about ad-nauseum.

3) Things that are not covered by the letter of the NDA, but we don't talk about them because we don't think it is in the best interests of the community to make them public.

With respect to (3), no doubt you are thinking "You arrogant bastards, who gave you the right to decide what's in our best interests to know or not know?". Well, you did. You elected us to make those decisions.

If you don't like the calls we are making, toss us out on our asses in the next election.


Are you kidding me?

There should NEVER be a #3.
Alt Two
Caldari Capital Construction Inc.
#211 - 2013-10-02 10:34:05 UTC
KIller Wabbit wrote:
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Tao Dolcino wrote:
Ahem, excuse me but the CSM has been create to restore the trust the players have lost in CCP... by more transparency...
Absolutely hopeless Roll

Allow me to explain how this works.

CCP tells us a lot of things about any particular topic, like the current controversy. These broadly fit into three categories:

1) Things that are covered under the NDA. We can't talk about those. If we did, we'd blow years of patient work getting CCP to trust us and tell us all sorts of NDA stuff. It is very much in your interests that CCP continue to do so.

2) Things that are not covered by the NDA, which we talk about ad-nauseum.

3) Things that are not covered by the letter of the NDA, but we don't talk about them because we don't think it is in the best interests of the community to make them public.

With respect to (3), no doubt you are thinking "You arrogant bastards, who gave you the right to decide what's in our best interests to know or not know?". Well, you did. You elected us to make those decisions.

If you don't like the calls we are making, toss us out on our asses in the next election.


Are you kidding me?

There should NEVER be a #3.

He probably made a small typo. I think #3 was supposed to be
"Things that are not covered by the letter of the NDA, but we don't talk about them because we want to make a profit from them before anyone else can."
Liam Todd Bloodstar
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#212 - 2013-10-02 10:56:03 UTC
Alt Two wrote:
KIller Wabbit wrote:
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Tao Dolcino wrote:
Ahem, excuse me but the CSM has been create to restore the trust the players have lost in CCP... by more transparency...
Absolutely hopeless Roll

Allow me to explain how this works.

CCP tells us a lot of things about any particular topic, like the current controversy. These broadly fit into three categories:

1) Things that are covered under the NDA. We can't talk about those. If we did, we'd blow years of patient work getting CCP to trust us and tell us all sorts of NDA stuff. It is very much in your interests that CCP continue to do so.

2) Things that are not covered by the NDA, which we talk about ad-nauseum.

3) Things that are not covered by the letter of the NDA, but we don't talk about them because we don't think it is in the best interests of the community to make them public.

With respect to (3), no doubt you are thinking "You arrogant bastards, who gave you the right to decide what's in our best interests to know or not know?". Well, you did. You elected us to make those decisions.

If you don't like the calls we are making, toss us out on our asses in the next election.


Are you kidding me?

There should NEVER be a #3.

He probably made a small typo. I think #3 was supposed to be
"Things that are not covered by the letter of the NDA, but we don't talk about them because we want to make a profit from them before anyone else can."


LOL, sounds like the US Congress...
Kara Roideater
#213 - 2013-10-02 11:31:28 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:

3) Things that are not covered by the letter of the NDA, but we don't talk about them because we don't think it is in the best interests of the community to make them public.

With respect to (3), no doubt you are thinking "You arrogant bastards, who gave you the right to decide what's in our best interests to know or not know?". Well, you did. You elected us to make those decisions.


Not really. A relatively small proportion of the player base elected you and then you make those decisions. Unless you stood on a platform of withholding stuff from the community that you don't have to withhold but think you should you can't claim any kind of electoral endorsement for those choices. You weren't elected to do just whatever you choose to do and you can't use the fact of being elected as a retrospective justification for all your actions as an elected individual. More generally, you were explicitly elected as representatives and conduits of communication, not as people with executive powers.
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#214 - 2013-10-02 11:59:41 UTC
Dunked.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#215 - 2013-10-02 12:34:09 UTC
Kara Roideater wrote:
Not really. A relatively small proportion of the player base elected you and then you make those decisions. Unless you stood on a platform of withholding stuff from the community that you don't have to withhold but think you should you can't claim any kind of electoral endorsement for those choices. You weren't elected to do just whatever you choose to do and you can't use the fact of being elected as a retrospective justification for all your actions as an elected individual. More generally, you were explicitly elected as representatives and conduits of communication, not as people with executive powers.

I was elected -- 4 times in a row -- to exercise my best judgment on behalf of the community.

If there happens to be something that all 14 CSMs decide not to talk about -- especially since one of us is the pre-eminent EVE blogger -- you can be pretty damn sure we have a good reason.

And as for being elected by a small proportion of the community, well, there's any easy fix for that. Gather together a bunch of people who agree with you that we're a bunch of arrogant, elitist bastards and elect someone who refuses to remain silent. You only need one brave maverick to blow the whistle on our corrupt cabal.

Twisted

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Kara Roideater
#216 - 2013-10-02 12:47:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Kara Roideater
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:

I was elected -- 4 times in a row -- to exercise my best judgment on behalf of the community.

If there happens to be something that all 14 CSMs decide not to talk about -- especially since one of us is the pre-eminent EVE blogger -- you can be pretty damn sure we have a good reason.

And as for being elected by a small proportion of the community, well, there's any easy fix for that. Gather together a bunch of people who agree with you that we're a bunch of arrogant, elitist bastards and elect someone who refuses to remain silent. You only need one brave maverick to blow the whistle on our corrupt cabal.

Twisted


The sarcasm sadly doesn't address the points I made. The line about 'elected to use our best judgement' is simply a justification for doing whatever you fancy. Of course, it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. You were elected to convey community views to CCP and to convey information from CCP back to the community. None of you has any kind of mandate to withhold information that you are allowed to release just because you don't think the plebs can be trusted with it.

As to being 'pretty damn sure' you have a good reason not to talk about something because you all agree not to, simply no. That is a vapid line that suggests that any group in a position of authority is correct simply on the grounds of their consensus. That is obviously false. I have no reason to think that your collective agreement on a point means that you have an actual good reason, only that you all happen to agree with each other. You mistake consensus for correctness. Unfortunately, you also deny those who you represent the ability to actually make an informed judgement about your actions (something that renders future electoral choices a problematic proposition) since not only are you making this decision, which exceeds your remit, but you are concealing the details of the decision from the public without there being any requirement to do so.
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#217 - 2013-10-02 13:00:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Varius Xeral
Even a pathetically insignificant amount of power corrupts

-Sun Tzu X after the Fourth Battle of New Carthage, 2050

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#218 - 2013-10-02 13:07:36 UTC
Does this argument over trebors judgement even matter? CCP have demonstrated they will simply exclude the csm from certain things, and ignore the issues and roll on with the problems even when the CSM do raise their voices.
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#219 - 2013-10-02 13:09:50 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Kara Roideater wrote:
Not really. A relatively small proportion of the player base elected you and then you make those decisions. Unless you stood on a platform of withholding stuff from the community that you don't have to withhold but think you should you can't claim any kind of electoral endorsement for those choices. You weren't elected to do just whatever you choose to do and you can't use the fact of being elected as a retrospective justification for all your actions as an elected individual. More generally, you were explicitly elected as representatives and conduits of communication, not as people with executive powers.

I was elected -- 4 times in a row -- to exercise my best judgment on behalf of the community.

If there happens to be something that all 14 CSMs decide not to talk about -- especially since one of us is the pre-eminent EVE blogger -- you can be pretty damn sure we have a good reason.

And as for being elected by a small proportion of the community, well, there's any easy fix for that. Gather together a bunch of people who agree with you that we're a bunch of arrogant, elitist bastards and elect someone who refuses to remain silent. You only need one brave maverick to blow the whistle on our corrupt cabal.

Twisted



Pretty sure the community never knew the CSM was willfully holding back on non-NDA covered items.

I ask that you give an example of such an issue.

Otherwise - the CSM continues to prove it is NOT in the best interest of the EVE community at large.
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#220 - 2013-10-02 13:19:55 UTC
Yeah, as interesting as this issue is (Jita Park is a better place for it), can we get some feedback from the CSM on the idea of asking CCP to ensure that in-game benefits are not given to in-game entities ever again? That would be the only positive return from this whole event now that it has gone through regardless because they didn't discuss it with the CSM until they were too far gone to turn back anyway.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal