CSM Campaigns

Hi. I’m running for CSM again.

As I said last year, I’m not running on a platform, I’m running on a skillset. I’m still a goon. My experience and space resume remains largely the same, albeit a year more of it. The only difference between this year and last is that I’d add to it my time as CSM. But what a difference a year makes.

If you’ve read the minutes, you’ll know that I have a wide variety of opinions on a wide variety of subjects. I’ve written on TMC about the intersection of mechanics, player motivation, and psychology. I’ve done some investigative journalism, and I’ve also been party to public criticism directed at CCP. I’m still committed to the idea that EVE is about relationships. At this point, anyone voting for me should know what they’re getting. In the immortal words of Popeye, “I yam what I yam and tha's all what I yam.”

In my campaign thread last year, I expressed hope that CCP had a plan for 0.0 and an understanding of how nullsec works. While there are a couple singular exceptions, CCP lacks both a plan and understanding. This is why I’m running again. I’m quite sure they’re all well intentioned, but nullsec is a unique and complicated ecosystem. I understand it far better than they do, and I’d rather they not introduce cane toads.

When I started my term last year, I had certain expectations of how the CSM worked and what it meant. For a hardened space politician, I was unfortunately naïve. That naïveté is gone. After hearing the CSM called a “PR tool” by one of CCP’s public relations people, I know where the CSM stands. After many of the disparaging comments made to me directly, I know where I stand. The new release cycle makes it harder than ever for the CSM to have input and be heard. The institution requires strong, professional voices from people with the confidence to, if necessary, fight. Because that’s what it takes, not sycophantic CCP apologists, not rabid anti-CCP detractors. It’s a tough balance to strike, and the people you vote in dictate the effectiveness of the institution itself. Vote wisely.

I’m a straight shooter. You might not always like what I say. CCP certainly doesn’t. But you’ll always know what I think, and why.

You’re quite welcome to mail me about various matters, but if you have any nuanced platform questions, please drop them here in thread as I’m not going to respond to EVE-mails asking for multi-paragraph explanations. It’s nothing personal, I simply don’t have the time to write a thousand mini-essays. I can also be reached on twitter @siggonK.

I wholeheartedly support the re-run of Sion to CSM X.

There are few in the game with the level of calmness, experience, and greater understanding of the game as a whole. Do not let the age old Grr Goons sentiments cloud the facts of him being a solid and reliable member that will fight for the best interests of the game as a whole. Sion is honed in on the key topics right now and with EVE in such a critical phase of developments right now, we all will want someone in the team that knows what they are talking about, has the years of experience, and has access to data through the wealth of resources within his alliance to ensure CCP are full aware of their decisions. For what it's worth, there are also few people in this game that I value on a personal level as much as Sion. He may be on CSM but he remains very much down to earth and approachable, unlike (some) other CSMs present and past

Vote for Sion Kumitomo

1. Goonswarm has a long history of bringing in newbees and in general being a newbee friendly organization. What we've found largely mirrors what CCP's statistics indicate: people who get involved in the social component of the game stick around longer. So while there are mechanical aspects that can be changed to flatten EVE's vertical learning curve, the biggest single factor is getting new players involved in the community. My focus is therefore on ways to get players the tools to help make that transition from npc corp to player corp as smooth and intuitive as possible.

2. I've yet to encounter a case where someone was arbitrarily banned for no reason whatsoever. And if you ask, everyone who is ever banned will say that they're innocent. That doesn't mean that CCP doesn't make mistakes and that there isn't room for improvement. But if it legitimately keeps you up at night, go find some truly innocent people and make a case study out of it, push loudly and publicly for reform. Offer some practical solutions, don't just toss rocks or concern troll.



Thanks for the endorsement dude, it's great to see you back in game too.



Hey Bam, thanks for the kind words. I'm still hoping you're kicking around that conversation you had with me and others in Vegas, just sayin'.

Sion really knows his stuff, its as simple as that, been a great asset to CSM. TBH he wont need help to get on, but he more than justifies his position.

I was the one who proposed the removal of "highsec awoxing," not CCP.

Can you elaborate on your reasons for this proposal?

It seems to me that there are no advantages to this change in game mechanics, only complications. "True" newbies aren't affected by awoxing (they don't even know what it is nor have any assets of note to lose), so they are unlikely to change their behaviour. It only serves to protect highsec corporations by removing one of the few remaining risks to them. Good highsec corps interested in training new players already have systems (background checks, dedicated training corps, etc.) to protect themselves, so all this does is encourage lazy and clueless CEOs to spam invites at new players risk-free, and may result in more new players ending up in small, low-quality corps run by equally clueless players. This will make their first Eve experience more frustrating than if they were recruited into a corp that demonstrated an understanding of game mechanics demanded to protect itself from awoxers, who could teach them about the game and support them properly.

More practically, removing awoxing also makes highsec corp training and intra-corp events more difficult, and removes one of the few remaining tools that can drive conflict between highsec corporations.

In my view, corporations should be meaningful and have value so players want to defend them - they should not be glorified chat channels. With that value should come the responsibility of defending those corporations from threats both external (wardecs) and from within (awoxing). Do you agree that a better solution might be to create a lower-tier corp (that is a glorified chat channel), that is immune to wardecs and awoxing, but that does not get the current benefits (taxes, POSes, etc.) of a player corp? New players and risk-adverse carebears can play there, while players who want the increased rewards and challenges of running a full player corp can still do so.

In short, what do you think a player corporation should be in Eve?

I don't see how intra-corp aggression mechanics are any more counter-intuitive than the rest of the game mechanics, especially in highsec. It may have been implemented as a byproduct of the coding which allowed corp-on-corp interactions, but has grown to serve a very real role in the training and culture (intracorp sparring) of many highsec corps. Removing it will be a headache, especially for larger highsec entities who use it routinely.

What is next, removing wardecs because it is "unintuitive" that when you join a new corporation (that is in a war) you might become a war target to someone else? Or remove suicide ganking because it is "unintuitive" that CONCORD may not be able to save you all the time?

These risks are what make the game interesting to play (otherwise everyone will just fit max yield/cargo), and are honestly the only significant non-consensual risks to players in highsec (although to be clear, dying unexpectedly to a corpmate is probably at least an order of magnitude less frequent than the other two). I agree there is no "right way" to play, but there is a "right way" to design a sandbox game - and that is to implement at least some measure of risk vs. reward balance across all activities.

If you want a 100% safe space for new players then just make one (as part of a NPE revamp?) with the appropriate levels of rewards, but highsec is suppose to be a place with risk as CCP Falcon has recently reminded us.

Best of luck on your CSM campaign.

I'll admit I was pretty skeptical of Sion last year, but as top of the Goon ballot he was getting in regardless. I've watched the summit minutes, Twitter and various other public outlets closely for his contributions this year and have been pleasantly surprised with what I've seen. Sion came in looking like a "typical meta-only Goon director" but has shown a solid breadth of capability and knowledge, not just an axe to grind for what can help the CFC. He is clearly thinking about what is good for the game as well.

I'm going to be sorry to see Mynnna's expertise in the financials go away, but Sion will be getting an endorsement from me in my endorsement post this year, despite that it is irrelevant to his election.

My only advice? More posts please, either on a blog or TMDC, whatever. Your writeup of the monument thing was fantastic. I'd love to see you post thoughts at that level of depth on more in-game topics.

The key question is: will you or Endie be top of ballot for the CFC?

Thanks for your service and proving my concerns wrong this term, Sion.

I'd definitely like to post and communicate more, I certainly have a lot I'd like to say. My problem is freeing up the time for it. Being the COO of GSF, running a coalition, doing diplomacy and running our diplomatic wing, CSMing, and then real life eats up a lot of time if you want to do any of it well. I've got fantastic time management skills, but unless I can flat out add more time to the day I have to prioritize. I've space fired myself from a few space jobs to make room as is.

Thanks for the thanks too. Though it seems like you set rather a low bar to clear. Which is good. My vertical is awful.

Sion and I haven't always seen eye to eye during CSM9. Some of that is public knowledge, some less so. For what it's worth, he is easily in the top two or three hardest workers on CSM9 and while we may disagree from time to time, I have absolute belief that he cares about the future of the game. He doesn't need my endorsement but someone who works so hard and has such passion for the game has it anyway.