These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: CSM8 - Second Summit Minutes

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sirane Elrek
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2014-04-04 19:43:58 UTC
Quote:
Mynnna ended the meeting by insulting all industrial alliances and saying that they will never be
more relevant than a PvP alliance who does industry as a hobby.

mynnna for csm9
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#22 - 2014-04-04 20:08:22 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
There is only one true CSM logo. Twisted



THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE

"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.
#23 - 2014-04-04 20:09:44 UTC
Grarr Dexx wrote:
Low-sec mentioned twice, and not once to admit it's **** space. Good to see not even the CSM gives a ****!


Yeah well lo-sec decided to sulk out the CSM8 election, so you got the representation you deserved.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Grarr Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#24 - 2014-04-04 20:33:44 UTC
So cause we don't have the numbers to vote in a voice for lowsec on some arbitrary game council, lowsec is entirely irrelevant and off the map for updates? Great.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#25 - 2014-04-04 20:37:53 UTC
Grarr Dexx wrote:
So cause we don't have the numbers to vote in a voice for lowsec on some arbitrary game council, lowsec is entirely irrelevant and off the map for updates? Great.

You have the numbers to do so, as demonstrated by the representation on many previous councils. You just have to put those numbers to use and/or hook up with some of the elected representatives to carry your voice.
Grarr Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#26 - 2014-04-04 20:45:38 UTC
Here's an even better idea: learn up on lowsec, fight for it and get even more votes than just your initial intended target group.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#27 - 2014-04-04 20:45:52 UTC
Grarr Dexx wrote:
So cause we don't have the numbers to vote in a voice for lowsec on some arbitrary game council, lowsec is entirely irrelevant and off the map for updates? Great.


No I mean because you didn't get off your flabby, oleaginous rumps and vote, there was no one on CSM8 with the lo-sec experience required to make sure that any lo-sec specific impact of the proposals discussed was raised.

I hope this has been a valuable illustration of the value of the "sulk-whine-quit" strategy of political activism for you all.

So: who you gonna vote for in CSM9?

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Grarr Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#28 - 2014-04-04 20:50:45 UTC
not u lol nerd
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#29 - 2014-04-04 20:52:11 UTC
As I read through the section of minutes regarding sov mechanics, I'm reminded of Russia's recent annexation of Crimea.

You didn't see the Russians burn everything before declaring Crimea now belongs to us. Effectively, they simply took down the TCU and put up their own. (A gross over-simplification. But you get the idea.)

So why do we have to burn everything to take sov? Food for thought.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Thead Enco
Thunderwaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#30 - 2014-04-04 21:01:02 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
There is only one true CSM logo. Twisted



THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE


Fixed
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#31 - 2014-04-04 21:04:53 UTC
Grarr Dexx wrote:
Here's an even better idea: learn up on lowsec, fight for it and get even more votes than just your initial intended target group.

You mean hook up with some of the elected representatives to carry your voice. Yes, that's an excellent idea compared to doing nothing and hoping your point will be made for you anyway… somehow…
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#32 - 2014-04-04 21:08:36 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Grarr Dexx wrote:
Here's an even better idea: learn up on lowsec, fight for it and get even more votes than just your initial intended target group.

You mean hook up with some of the elected representatives to carry your voice. Yes, that's an excellent idea compared to doing nothing and hoping your point will be made for you anyway… somehow…


Fortunately, some of them figured out the problem, and there's a very strong slate of lowsec candidates this year.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Thead Enco
Thunderwaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#33 - 2014-04-04 21:10:41 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
As I read through the section of minutes regarding sov mechanics, I'm reminded of Russia's recent annexation of Crimea.

You didn't see the Russians burn everything before declaring Crimea now belongs to us. Effectively, they simply took down the TCU and put up their own. (A gross over-simplification. But you get the idea.)

So why do we have to burn everything to take sov? Food for thought.


Because
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#34 - 2014-04-04 21:26:42 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Fortunately, some of them figured out the problem, and there's a very strong slate of lowsec candidates this year.

Even better. It shouldn't even be difficult since iirc, you needed maybe 2,000 votes to get on it last time around, and even less than that before STV was implemented.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#35 - 2014-04-04 22:47:34 UTC
Grarr Dexx wrote:
not u lol nerd


Correct, since I declared 14 months ago I wasn't doing 2 terms.

Good luck with your SW:Q

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#36 - 2014-04-04 23:01:40 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Most of you probably should have learned this by now, but you're pretty much always best to ignore anything Malcanis posts (on any forum).

There's some significant lowsec stuff that I'm looking forward to announcing a bit later in the pre-release rampup. Everyone should vote in the CSM elections, but we're not going to ignore any area of space no matter how few delegates they may have.

And no Grarr this doesn't mean we're going to lift the restriction on drone assist, you can stop asking.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#37 - 2014-04-04 23:04:07 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Most of you probably should have learned this by now, but you're pretty much always best to ignore anything Malcanis posts (on any forum).


The Eagle is too powerful and grossly overused. It needs a brutal nerf.

"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.
#38 - 2014-04-04 23:09:18 UTC
You know that already, right?

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Grarr Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#39 - 2014-04-04 23:12:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Grarr Dexx
CCP Fozzie wrote:
And no Grarr this doesn't mean we're going to lift the restriction on drone assist, you can stop asking.


"No, pirates aren't allowed access to all of EVE Online's features, you naughty space pilots!"
CCP Xhagen
C C P
C C P Alliance
#40 - 2014-04-04 23:13:56 UTC
SeneschaI wrote:
finally! yay!
"Session 16" wrote:
Xhagen threw out a question to the CSM regarding the differences between corporation mechanics and the social aspect of corporations.
Not as much 'differences' as 'handicaps' (mechanics that are beta programming dinosaurs) crippling the social aspects of corporations to the point where the CSM blindly agreed there's a "difference" between npc and player corps.

Really? The comparison shouldn't by all rights even be in the same ballpark as an NPC corp. Makes you wonder how much reflection bitter vets have for the blinkered view they acquire.

The fact the question elicited comments about NPC corps being comparable is proof positive people aren't looking at solutions beyond bandaids. The system is horrible. the fact that Xhagen's question provoked tepid response is horrifying to me and everyone who's been a CEO who at least tries to give power to the people (not just greedily hoard them for the directors/ceo as is the wont of the current overly complex, full of loopholes, paranoiac surrealistic nightmare mechanics)

The actual response to Xhagen's question should have been a resounded "There's a vast gulf!"

Good to know.

My line of thinking can also be described as "is the reason for forming a corp a social one or a game mechanic one?" and then the second thought is "would there be any benefit of having a social group, more than just a chat channel, without the baggage that corps are (i.e. the assets, wars, etc.)?"

CCP Xhagen | Associate Producer | @strangelocation