Jita Park Speakers Corner

My biggest concern with the CSM right now isn't the Null sec thing, after all, I live in NPC null and I'm aware of the various issues going on in Null.

My main concern is with the representation of (or lack of) the "Average Joe'" The guy who tools around in hi sec doing level 4's and docking up in stations during war time, you know, that type of guy. I might be wrong here, but I'm sure they make up a large segment of the EVE community, sure, they'll probably never come down to null or whatever, but they still play the game and pay fees. I think that the CSM (as well as the rest of us who live and work in null or low) tend to narrow one's focus on what's important to their own interest at any particular time.
I think a positive reinforcement campaign by the CSM that reaches out to the average Joe, would go a long way to giving them a feeling of inclusion. In other words, the CSM should work on their communication and provide regular updates and feedback.
Just my two cents.

What representation does this guy need though? He confines himself to a minute subsection of what it's possible to do in EVE and has no interest in the rest of it. His missions work pretty much the same as they always did, maybe he has recently been pleasantly surprised to find that his Kronos suddenly works somewhat better than it used to, and I bet he likes the new nebulae and generally improved look of EVE.

What are the burning issues confronting Average Joe that he will care about whether or not he's represented on the CSM? He'd probably like more missions, and maybe he'd like ones that are more fun to do but really, there's very little contention against improving EVE's horribly sub-par PvE.

I like Dunbar and Malcanis' lines of reasoning here .... though I would mention, isn't it just simply true that if the "average Joe" type DOES head out to Null, he really will experience exactly what his corp mates have told him .... (he'll quickly be podded, killed, laughed at, scammed, and scorned as "not a member of the NullSec Elite club)?

I like the idea of reaching out to such players --> but really, wouldn't we first need an entirely new type of NullSec experience to sell them on? Some way they could actually go out there and do something fun, without having to become meatshield #999, loyal subject of Militant Alliance #675, with only Blob warfare to look forward to everyday? I've had probably 5 corp members head out to null and they ended up coming back in 3 months for exactly these reasons (they did join up with larger Alliances which lowered the scorn factor, and helped them not get podded often).

I realize I'm exagerrating here ... but isn't this really what the problem boils down to? --> we need a new type of nullsec experience if we want to get "average joes" to WANT to play it?

You want representation for Python scripts?

So... why do we still have CSM ?

NO doubt CSM is an effective tool for CCP!

It shouldn't be the ONLY tool though .... we SHOULD care about what the Average Joe (non voting) player cares about, because we need them to remain loyal subscribers .... so why doesn't CCP avail itself of all the other types of additional tools that good marketing companies use? (maybe they do and we just don't see it? Maybe it's under NDA?)

The CSM basically amounts to nothing more than simply a "long term" "Focus Group". Focus Groups are notoriously horrible at detecting what will be successful or unsuccessful in the market ... very hit and miss, and should not be relied upon without other sources of input.

While I do like much of what the CSM has advocated, it's unclear to me whether CCP would not have already done these things even without the CSM .... especially if they availed themselves of much more disciplined and widespread user surveys and feedback tools.

So yes, IMO, we should keep the CSM! No, it's probably not possible to optimize representation for different blocks (Nullsec, Losec, Hisec, etc.) - just as in real life, there's no way to PROVE anyone cares about a certain set of issues, other than through their actions after the vote. Yes, CCP should listen to their CSM "focus group" closely ... But they should supplement CSM feedback with better tools (global feedback surveys for example), so that they, AND the CSM, have good data to work with for making design decisions.

Wow, well put ....

On the plus side, their approach gets big headlines .... seems like all the headlines do though is pull in 3 week trial subs who abruptly leave ....

I knew i dint have to comment this post

Anecdotal experience based on ~15 new joiners personally witnessed, no citation forthcoming but maybe you can get CCP to share recent subscription trends?

Do the headlines KEEP you around too though?