Assembly Hall

Said the tin supplier and foil maker.

Explain why the CSM is better than all of the other methods for systematically gathering stakeholder input.

• Why is it better to filter everything through a small group of people who are self-admittedly acting in their own best interest?

• Is the purpose of the CSM to provide feedback on the game? If so, who is gathering the input from the groups not represented by the current CSM members?

• Since the majority of players don't even vote, can it even be said that the CSM is truly a representative body in the traditional sense? If we're going to pretend that its a democratic process, the process itself must first be decided on by the body politic, which is something that never occurred. If low participation is a sign that the majority of players feel the CSM is a sham, then why do we still have a CSM. The "vote" would seem to already be in and counted. Why not formalize it? Let's have a vote to decide whether there should even be a CSM. Or a vote to decide between a variety of methods to accomplish the same goals.

Finally, *adjusts tinfoil hat* what checks and balances prevent any CSM member from from acting on NDA information through indirect means? A smart, observant player with resources and an advanced understanding of the interrelationships of game mechanics could easily get his group to act in such a way that no one could ever say he violated the NDA, yet they would still benefit from it. E.g. it is confidentially revealed moons will be reseeded throughout EVE. So an alliance leader opts to not defend the space he currently controls and instead prepare to move to whatever new locations are eventually revealed. There's no way to prove he stopped defending it based on that information. I'm not saying its happened for sure, but the metagame extends into the CSM process, so it seems safe to assume that it does. Intelligent belligerents use every tool they can.

This isn't necessarilly better. And I don't think CCP intends it to be the only way to get input.

I would say ccp have been very good about getting information from the forums about what players want. In fact I would bet there have been 5xs as many posts directly from devs as there have been posts from our csm representatives on the forums.

Most people at ccp are smart enough to know that the csm is not representative representative of the playerbase at large.

They pretty much have.

Don't get me wrong the csm is helpful to ccp.

But its pretty clear that many people just voted for whoever their alliance leaders told them to vote for. There was no real close consideration of why they play eve and whether their alliance leaders ideas will make them play eve longer.