These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Jayne for CSMX - ELECTED! - Thank you for your support!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lex Arson
Adversity.
Psychotic Tendencies.
#21 - 2015-01-06 06:04:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Lex Arson
are you going to betray all of us like you did to Doom?

also, from reading your OP, it sounds like your main focus on CSM is to add in-game mechanics that enable more NPSI content. Why take something which main selling is "you don't have to leave your corp or join ours to roam" and then add in all this functionality that basically makes it another corp?

Quote:
The list of things that could (and should) be either tweaked or completely redesigned is rather substantial, but I'm confident that with my experience both as a corporate CEO and leader of the largest channel based community in the game, I can help CCP make the right decisions.


During the time I worked with you your leadership decisions were questionable, you have a long line of people who have worked with you in the past claiming you've shorted them and/or straight up betrayed them, and from my point of view your FC/leadership decisions have been driven by passion and rash impulse rather than spending a lot of time and thought on them. Will we see this behavior reflect during your presumed term on the CSM?

Do we really need more official subgroups in EVE apart from corp/alliance/militia? A few years ago there was a short clamour for implementation for a 'coalition' mechanic in EVE; doesn't this mentality just encourage redundant feature creep? For NPSI fleets, do we really need anything more than another fleet finder filter called "Public?" Because what are corps/sigs/whatevers apart from a shared chat channel and mailing list?

This past CSM we've seen chairs filled by members who contributed nothing to the pressing matters at hand and served to promote their own interests; which is technically all the CSM is, if CCP isn't going to pay attention to what you have to say because they don't deem it a pressing matter (they won't), then why waste a chair seat on it?

CCP has given you the tools you need and told you how to use them; chat channels and mailing lists. We don't a CSM member just to tell CCP that we should have a spectre fleet logo on killmails.

There's no use crying after every mistake, you just keep on trying 'til you run out of cake.
Jayne Fillon
#22 - 2015-01-06 06:28:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Jayne Fillon
Lex Arson wrote:
are you going to betray all of us like you did to Doom?
Assuming that was a serious question, no. In game politics and personas have no place on CSM - a la Gorski Car acting like an idiot or Mynnna acting only in the interest of the CFC, instead of serving the playerbase as a whole.

EDIT: You edited your post while I was mid-response, I'll answer the new stuff that you added in a separate response.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
Jayne Fillon
#23 - 2015-01-06 07:04:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Jayne Fillon
Quote:
It sounds like your main focus on CSM is to add in-game mechanics that enable more NPSI content. Why take something which main selling is "you don't have to leave your corp or join ours to roam" and then add in all this functionality that basically makes it another corp?


Good question. First, the mechanics that I referred to are not limited to NPSI communities, but would be useful to a large number of groups from all over New Eden. For example, the mechanics that are being discussed regarding fleet adverts would certainly help the NPSI communities, but would also help anyone who interacted with the fleet mechanic - that is, the majority of Eve.

Quote:
During the time I worked with you your leadership decisions were questionable, you have a long line of people who have worked with you in the past claiming you've shorted them and/or straight up betrayed them, and from my point of view your FC/leadership decisions have been driven by passion and rash impulse rather than spending a lot of time and thought on them. Will we see this behavior reflect during your presumed term on the CSM?


I'm normally a very analytical person, and when I don't know something or when I realize I've made an error, I'm usually the first to admit to it. As for my leadership style and the betrayal of people I've worked with in the past, that's a different story entirely. In my experience it's often the people who feel they are owed something, such as the loyalty of others, who feel the most betrayed when something goes wrong. For example, as a CEO of a corporation I feel responsible to my people first and foremost, and when they stop enjoying the game (for whatever reason) it is my job to rectify that as soon as possible, and in whatever way possible. Structures, friendships, legacies... they can all be rebuilt - but we play this game first and foremost to have fun.

... and if we're not having fun, why are we playing?

Quote:
Do we really need more official subgroups in EVE apart from corp/alliance/militia? A few years ago there was a short clamour for implementation for a 'coalition' mechanic in EVE; doesn't this mentality just encourage redundant feature creep? For NPSI fleets, do we really need anything more than another fleet finder filter called "Public?" Because what are corps apart from a shared chat channel and mailing list?


Even a "public" fleet finder would be a useful, and simple, addition to current mechanics and yet it has still not been implemented. As for the coalition mechanics and feature creep, these "entities" already exist in game, just not in an official capacity. Coalitions will exist regardless of a mechanic officially supporting it, as with the communities that currently exist exist regardless of the amount of tools CCP has made available. Viewing it strictly from the "quality of life" perspective, if the vast majority of the playerbase is already playing the game in this manner, why would CCP not add the functionality? With these sorts of tools you would not only make the existing groups stronger, but promote new and more diverse groups in the future.

What are corps other than shared chat channels and mailing lists? Shared standings, calendars, fleet adverts, contracts, roles, kill logs, history, titles..... the list is endless. Corporations also allow for the ownership of structures and declarations of war - features which should not be granted to a "corp lite" model. This is where the distinction is made - Eve doesn't even have a friends list, and yet is billed as a social and community based game. Want to be friends with someone in game who isn't in your corporation? Interact with them? Good luck. Anyone who has participated in a non corporation based group is well aware of just what is missing, and what minor changes could drastically increase a member's quality of life.

Quote:
This past CSM we've seen chairs filled by members who contributed nothing to the pressing matters at hand and served to promote their own interests; which is technically all the CSM is, if CCP isn't going to pay attention to what you have to say because they don't deem it a pressing matter (they won't), then why waste a chair seat on it?


This is where I get to empirically say that you're wrong. This is a priority for CCP whether you like it or not. This was made clear in both the Fanfest keynote speech as well as the update to the development roadmap during the Eve Vegas keynote speech. The details are in the OP if you're interested. That being said, I'm well aware that there will be more involved with the CSM than solely this topic, this is simply the facet a CCP's roadmap where I consider myself a subject matter expert.

This is no different than Steve being an SME in 3rd Party Development, Manny a SME in Sovereignty Warfare, Mike Azariah a SME for highsec or corebloodbrothers is a SME on the NRDS playstyle. Even when those topics are not at hand, those individuals can and still do contribute to the discussion - as will I. My knowledge and experiences in Eve are certainly focused in this area of the game, but certainly not limited by them.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
Lex Arson
Adversity.
Psychotic Tendencies.
#24 - 2015-01-06 08:29:33 UTC
Jayne Fillon wrote:
Good question. First, the mechanics that I referred to are not limited to NPSI communities, but would be useful to a large number of groups from all over New Eden. For example, the mechanics that are being discussed regarding fleet adverts would certainly help the NPSI communities, but would also help anyone who interacted with the fleet mechanic - that is, the majority of Eve.


Except you have not yet referred to any mechanics specifically, apart from that there is a substantial list of them; in fact the only solid mechanic you have named that you would support is one that I brought up. What other mechanics do you propose that would help these informal organizations feel more cohesive? Additionally, of the ones you named (nullsec SIGs, highsec incursion groups, roleplayers and lore aficionados, gankers and anti-gankers, podcasters, traders, bloggers, and NPSI communities) I can only see three, perhaps four that would get any use out of these yet unnamed mechanics you propose, and only maybe 1 (your NPSI) can make a passable argument for spending any sort of development time into improving.

So tl;dr, how would these corporation-interface-style mechanics help bloggers? roleplayers? podcasters? What precisely would you propose we add? CCP's financial reports have looked grim recently, though the new trailer and expansions have added a wealth of new players and subs do you think CCP is going to invest the developer time and money into making these ideas into reality, when it's not something that is very marketable to new subscribers or returning players?

Quote:
I'm normally a very analytical person, and when I don't know something or when I realize I've made an error, I'm usually the first to admit to it. As for my leadership style and the betrayal of people I've worked with in the past, that's a different story entirely. In my experience it's often the people who feel they are owed something, such as the loyalty of others, who feel the most betrayed when something goes wrong. For example, as a CEO of a corporation I feel responsible to my people first and foremost, and when they stop enjoying the game (for whatever reason) it is my job to rectify that as soon as possible, and in whatever way possible. Structures, friendships, legacies... they can all be rebuilt - but we play this game first and foremost to have fun.

... and if we're not having fun, why are we playing?


If elected, you will owe your constituents the full devotion of the time you can afford to commit to the game towards forwarding the platform you ran on. Even if other CSM members disagree with you or CCP says "no" to something you can't just pout out and quit on the people that elected you. Being on the CSM is probably not going to be very 'fun,' it entails playing nicely with other people you might not like or agree with. As far as whether or not you can do this, all we have to go on is your track record in game, which is not stellar.

Quote:
Even a "public" fleet finder would be a useful, and simple, addition to current mechanics and yet it has still not been implemented. As for the coalition mechanics and feature creep, these "entities" already exist in game, just not in an official capacity. Coalitions will exist regardless of a mechanic officially supporting it, as with the communities that currently exist exist regardless of the amount of tools CCP has made available...


Much like coalitions, these groups like NPSI fleets and SIGs already exist and are strong in the game as-is. They certainly don't need mechanics to exist or be popular, as we can see from various Ganked/Spectre/Bombers Bar fleets. What I want to know is, what exactly do you propose should be added, why is it necessary, and is it feasible for CCP to invest into making it happen when they are already faced with the issues of making real corporations and alliances work; none of which you have given a tangible answer to.

There's no use crying after every mistake, you just keep on trying 'til you run out of cake.
Lex Arson
Adversity.
Psychotic Tendencies.
#25 - 2015-01-06 08:30:19 UTC
Quote:
What are corps other than shared chat channels and mailing lists? Shared standings, calendars, fleet adverts, contracts, roles, kill logs, history, titles..... the list is endless. Corporations also allow for the ownership of structures and declarations of war - features which should not be granted to a "corp lite" model. This is where the distinction is made - Eve doesn't even have a friends list, and yet is billed as a social and community based game. Want to be friends with someone in game who isn't in your corporation? Interact with them? Good luck. Anyone who has participated in a non corporation based group is well aware of just what is missing, and what minor changes could drastically increase a member's quality of life.


-NPSI groups have no need of standings. If you want to share a standings list, chat channel, and mailing list with somebody and you're in an NPC corp, CCP has already given you the tools for this: it's called joining a corp.
----Incidentally, CCP has stated the want to push people OUT of NPC corps and into player corps, and will likely not push the game in a direction that gives you more incentive to play in an NPC corp.
-Calendars; this is easily done with third party tools. I wish we had integrated jabber, timerboards, forums, skill training plans, jump planning tools as well; but we make do with what we have because CCP only has so much dev time it can commit to any given thing, and more often than not the third party developers do a better job because they have more free time to work on their pet project. I would rather CCP not spend valuable developer time on half-assing something that has already been done better by a third party.
-Fleet adverts; again, add an option for a 'public.' I'm not CSM and I can tweet the entire dev team right now and tell them that if you'd like. They'll see it.
-Contracts; just use public contracts. If you're worried about somebody gaming your contract pricing, well market PvP is a part of EVE, and you're equally at risk for it with any sort of NPSI venture that anybody can join.
-Roles; I'm not even sure what roles would be used for in a 'corp lite' as you own no structures, no sov, no 'corp assets.' As far as chat channels and mailing lists go, we already have moderation abilities for these.

Eve DOES have a friends list, it's called a contacts list. It's also called a corp chat window, which you get when you join a corp. You can also join numerous player-made channels, like I do, where I chat with many of my friends who are in different corps and alliances, some of which are hostile to me, and some which live on the opposite side of the universe. They hang out on comms with me, and sometimes they jump clone and come play spaceships with me. I don't know what more you want.

Quote:
This is where I get to empirically say that you're wrong. This is a priority for CCP whether you like it or not. This was made clear in both the Fanfest keynote speech as well as the update to the development roadmap during the Eve Vegas keynote speech. The details are in the OP if you're interested. That being said, I'm well aware that there will be more involved with the CSM than solely this topic, this is simply the facet a CCP's roadmap where I consider myself a subject matter expert.


I might be entirely 100% wrong by this, but glimpsing through the materials presented in your OP I see CCP making corp and alliance overhaul a priority, not out-of-corp organizations.

In addition, after typing all this, I'm still not sure if you're proposing some sort of 'faction group' like the militia's that overlays on top of your current corp or alliance, or a 'corp lite' that is an entirely seperate corp but basically without structures or awoxing. You seem to be a proponent of both, but pick one and run with it.

tl;dr, CCP has stated many times they want people to be in player corps. CCP does not want to encourage the 'NPC corp lifestyle.' As far as flying with people outside of your corp (NPSI) we already have the tools to make this work, and it does work wonderfully. As far as flying in interest groups inside your corp/alliance (SIGs), again we already have the tools to make these work. I agree there are several small QoL improvements that could be made, but I don't see a compelling reason to advocate any sort of 'corp lite' or 'NPSI faction' as an in-game mechanic. CCP wants people's social groups to operate around corps and alliances, that is why they exist in the first place. If Joe Casual wants to pick up his atron and go and be a part of a nice fleet fight for the weekend, he can do so through Ganked or Spectre. If he wants to be a part of something more serious and long-term, he joins a corp. NPSI groups/SIGs are a wonderful thing and they add a lot to the EVE community, but I don't see how EVE benefits from making it into another hardcoded 'social group' alongside corps, alliances, and militias, especially when half the draw to these social groups is the lack of required long-term commitment from the individual pilot.

There's no use crying after every mistake, you just keep on trying 'til you run out of cake.
Jayne Fillon
#26 - 2015-01-06 09:39:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Jayne Fillon
Quote:
Except you have not yet referred to any mechanics specifically, apart from that there is a substantial list of them; in fact the only solid mechanic you have named that you would support is one that I brought up. What other mechanics do you propose that would help these informal organizations feel more cohesive?


The references to find this information was located in the OP, but I'll recreate it here:

  • Group Calendars
  • Group Fitting List
  • Group Bulletins
  • Group Contracts
  • Group Logo
  • Fleet to Fleet Standings
  • Fleet Standings
  • Fleet Kill History
  • Fleet Adverts
  • Disconnecting while in Fleet
  • Active Members List
  • Official Channel Listing
  • Channel History
  • Channel Roles and Modes
  • Mailing List Roles
  • Mailing List Population Cap
  • Mailing List Links

As you said, not all of these will benefit communities or social groups that do not work around the fleet mechanic. Even so, the amount of people who fleeting up with one another outside the boundaries of the corporation mechanic is astonishing, and more than most people realize. In Spectre Fleet alone there are 4000 people registered on the mailing list, the maximum allowed. Last saturday, during our "Golden Fleet" event with RvB Ganked over 700 people joined our NPSI fleet. We are but one of five major NPSI communities in Eve, not to mention the major Russian and German NPSI communities.

What about Incursion channels? The Valhalla Project, The Ditanian Fleet, Warp To Me, and Incursion Shiny Network all run on the same principals of our PvP NPSI communities for their PvE NPSI content in highsec. They do this because the corporation mechanic is not only useless to them but detracts from their desired way to play the game. These organizations are more active, more capable, more social, than a lot of organization that use the corporate mechanics. Do these people not deserve a voice? You're simply insane if you think that these entities are undeserving of "any development time."

Moving onto non-fleet based communities and how their QoL could be improved. Streaming communities such as SirSqueebles and EVE-Radio currently have nothing but links to OOG browsers and websites in order to deliver their content or host their communities. Twitch broadcast integration already exists, why not watch Eve streamers in client? Why not be able to listen to EVE-Radio in game? Lore aficionados have their Arek'Jaalan mailing list, and would benefit from these changes, as well as being able to collaborate on deciphering the mysteries of in game events such as Caroline's Star.

Oh, and how would Anti-Gankers benefit from these changes? This is my favorite one to answer.

This blog post from MinerBumping.com describes the hostile takeover of the "Anti-Ganking" channel. For those who aren't experienced with running a group that bases out of a channel, you might be surprised that the only role you can give someone is "operator," which is equivalent to a full director. Any operator has the exact same roles as the channel founder, there is no other option. Unfortunately for the owners of Anti-Ganking, an operator went rogue and completely nuked the channel. If you want to know the full story, read the blog post.

To put this in perspective, as the CEO or a corporation, you would have to give a member full director roles even if you wanted the only to do something trivial like send a mail or make a bookmark. Tell me that isn't completely insane.

Quote:
Being on the CSM [...] entails playing nicely with other people you might not like or agree with. As far as whether or not you can do this, all we have to go on is your track record in game, which is not stellar.


A few bad apples in every bundle. Just because you don't like me, doesn't mean that I'm incapable of forming friendships or profession working relationship with other people. As a leader it's impossible to make everyone happy, and you'll always get along with some better than others. This is true whether spoken in the context of a corporation, a community, or a council.

Quote:
... these groups like NPSI fleets and SIGs already exist and are strong in the game as-is, they certainly don't need mechanics to exist or be popular.


Dotlan is a popular and powerful tool that already exists. Should this stop CCP from updating the ingame map? No, don't be ridiculous. Same goes for literally any other third party tool: fleet-up, carebearium, siggy, pyfa, PLH, etc etc.

Quote:
What I want to know is, what exactly do you propose should be added, why is it necessary, and is it feasible for CCP to invest into making it happen when they are already faced with the issues of making real corporations and alliances work; none of which you have given a tangible answer to.


I'd like to make it clear that my ideas and proposals are not separate from a corporation and alliance redesign, but a part of it. However, it's my belief that even rework the corporation mechanics from the ground up will fail to include all of the needs and wants of the playerbase, to facilitate how they play the game. I am equally excited to contribute to corporation reform, and whatever else that leads to.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
Jayne Fillon
#27 - 2015-01-06 09:58:32 UTC
Quote:
NPSI groups have no need of...


Speak for yourself.

I get it, you don't play NPSI, and you never have. You aren't involved in any of these communities, and as such the Eve you play is vastly different from the one that myself and thousands of others play. I'm not going to be pedantic regarding each and every point that you feel like we can do "fine enough without."

Regarding third party tools, we'll simply have to agree to disagree.

Quote:
CCP has stated the want to push people OUT of NPC corps and into player corps


.... and I agree with this direction. NPSI communities already serve as the catalyst that many people need to convert from PvE to PvP. We draw from all over Eve: established pirate corporations, weekend warriors playing with friends, incursion runner looking for a change of pace, **** even Mike Azariah participates in PvP through organizations such as Spectre Fleet. These communities are not a hinderance in anyway to players getting involved in a corporation, if anything they are the gateway.

Quote:
I might be entirely 100% wrong by this, but glimpsing through the materials presented in your OP I see CCP making corp and alliance overhaul a priority, not out-of-corp organizations.


One and the same. You'll also noticed I referenced material from currently sitting CSM members who view this in the same light as I do, and are either proposing ideas themselves or looking for feedback on possible mechanics.

Quote:
I'm still not sure if you're proposing some sort of 'faction group' like the militia's that overlays on top of your current corp or alliance, or a 'corp lite' that is an entirely separate corp but basically without structures or awoxing. You seem to be a proponent of both, but pick one and run with it.


That's neither my job, nor my choice. There are many ways of implementing this that would achieve the desired result. I don't get to direct the entire development process, and it's extremely likely this process is already underway. If elected to the CSM, it would be my focus to ensure that no matter what version of the redesign CCP has chosen to pursue, it would be beneficial for everyone of where they live in New Eden or what they do.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#28 - 2015-01-06 20:36:57 UTC
+1 for OP!

Herding a NPSI fleet to consistent success has to be good training for working with CCP on the CSM.
Ibrahim Vaughn Holtzman
the holtzman experience
CAStabouts
#29 - 2015-01-06 20:41:20 UTC
Seraph IX Basarab
Outer Path
Seraphim Division
#30 - 2015-01-06 22:14:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Seraph IX Basarab
Ahh Jayne, the entertainment train that never stops. Lol You know you should be worried if Lex and I agree on anything.


So a few points which I doubt you'll answer but should nonetheless be presented here:


1. You have a long LONG history of scamming, drama mongering and outright lying to people in Eve which you were suppose to work with. I'm not talking about some dinky little unknown corp where you awoxed a member and then kicked some inactives You actually went out of your way to falsify information and attempt to incriminate others for your twisted obsessive plot. You've even recently stolen billions in assets from the alliance known as Overload Everything who's 2IC, Doom, you were seen only a few months ago having beers with in person. You even failed to grab a position in the last CSM election according to some because of your crooked methods. Now your answer to that is "this is just a game." That much is true. But if flying NPSI suddenly makes you the posterboy for the movement and gives you the credentials to run a CSM campaign on that platform, what does all the lying and drama mongering say about you as a candidate? At the end of the day yes scamming is part of Eve, but when it comes to running an organized and potent CSM team, is that what the players of Eve need? Why does playing Eve the way that you do give you credentials for the CSM in one instance but is only regarded as "just a game" when it doesn't suit you?

2. Your big selling point is that you created Spectre Fleet and that your experience in running public fleets gives you the credentials to be a CSM. Yet even Spectre Fleet was created by drama mongering in Bombers Bar, AWOXing the main FC, Tempelman N, something which you lied about. We can say this is excusable. But what is really concerning is that you contradict your own position on a very basic premise. NPSI is suppose to not be about corps yet this internal mail where you allow your members to refer to you as a certain Dictator of the Third Reich, a title which you seem to adore, clearly shows an elitist attitude where Spectre Fleet is simply an extension of your corp to use and to wield for whatever whims you may have. SASH has been referred to as "more of a cult than a corp." How do you answer these criticisms?

3. Last election year you were listed as a candidate on the official CFC ballot. Even with the CFC's backing you failed to take a position on the CSM but my question is how can you talk yourself up as a person of the NPSI community when you seem to be sitting in the same corner with one of the major nullsec blocs? What assurances do we have as the voter?

4. Lastly, none of your suggestions really bring anything to the game. Everything you described pretty much already exists within the corp model or has out of game alternatives. The elements you want to take from the corp model and applying it the NPSI community already has viable alternatives. Your ideas are not fully thought out or developed and your platform is a mile wide but only an inch deep. Unfortunately your bid for the CSM seems to be more about yourself rather than the people you (supposedly) wish to represent and that this position, like Spectre Fleet, will simply be used to further your position in game. With your history of drama mongering, dishonesty and could we say, right narcissism (?) why would anyone vote for you? Not only would a CSM seat be out right wasted, your history of sabotaging (attempted or other wise) your partners, your presence may actually be a detriment to the process all together.
KanonKongen
#31 - 2015-01-06 22:47:25 UTC
*popcorn*
Garbage Man Forever
Doomheim
#32 - 2015-01-06 23:00:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Garbage Man Forever
dis gon b gud

Seraph, I'm surprised you aren't spamming your new WH channel in here too.

+1 Jayne for CSM :D
Darth A30NZ
Deep Axion
Honorable Third Party
#33 - 2015-01-06 23:15:03 UTC
+1 for me. Jayne, SASH and Sepctre changed how I EvE for the better. Long live NPSI.

New Eden Spotlight full episode list. 

http://www.youtube.com/user/NewEdenSpotlight/videos
mikeshaw91 inkura
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#34 - 2015-01-06 23:20:23 UTC
+1 from me - grabs popcorn to watch Lex and Seraph embarrass themselves.
Creeping Kaos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#35 - 2015-01-06 23:23:38 UTC
I started my EVE career like most, mining and doing missions and learning the game via the starter NPC corp. I was recruited by Anger Kidd of Aegis Requiem and the wonderful world of corp dynamics was opened up to me and I fell in love with game once more. Learning how to PVP within my new corp left me hungry to learn more and to become an FC myself. After a friend recommended I join Bombers Bar I was now initiated into NPSI fleets, I never turned back. I met Jayne and flew with him several times while in BB. it wasn't until the fall of BB and subsequent rise of a new NPSI community (Spectre Fleet) that i truly got to know Jayne as a community leader and a FC.

Jayne Fillon's passionate commitment to the NPSI community shows in every event he hosts, as well as his commitment outside of the game. His talk at last years EVE Vegas outlined not only his commitment but where he see's this community growing and with growth comes a need for voice.

That Voice is Jayne Fillon.


JAYNE FILLON for CSMX

> To walk fully in the light, one must first be intimate with the dark.
Jayne Fillon
#36 - 2015-01-06 23:31:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Jayne Fillon
Hi Seraph! Thanks for helping me win a bet.

I promised myself that when you eventually came around I'd respond to you once, and only once, so here we go.

Quote:
At the end of the day yes scamming is part of Eve, but when it comes to running an organized and potent CSM team, is that what the players of Eve need? Why does playing Eve the way that you do give you credentials for the CSM in one instance but is only regarded as "just a game" when it doesn't suit you?


You're comparing apples to oranges to here, and it just doesn't make sense. Scamming, metagaming, and espionage are all parts of Eve, parts of Eve that are not only supported through the existing mechanics, but supported by the developers themselves. I've engaged in these activities previously and I'm not ashamed by that, nor do I think it diminishes of my other accomplishments. Put a different way, what I do in game has no affect on my compulsions in real life when in a professional setting, this much should be obvious. As it's been said countless time before, "Welcome to Eve."

Yes, I had beers with Doom in Vegas along with a lot of other wonderful people. I greatly enjoyed my first player gathering and will certainly be attending again in the future. Regardless of our interactions in game or how they eventually ended up, I wasn't trying to buddy-buddy him while in Vegas with a malicious intent to deceive. That's ridiculous. Even if I met you at one of these gatherings, god forbid, I would pay you the respect you deserve and treat you like a normal human being instead of an internet villain.

I fail to see why this is a difficult concept.

Quote:
NPSI is supposed to not be about corps yet this internal mail where you allow your members to refer to you as a certain Dictator of the Third Reich, a title which you seem to adore, clearly shows an elitist attitude where Spectre Fleet is simply an extension of your corp to use and to wield for whatever whims you may have. SASH has been referred to as "more of a cult than a corp." How do you answer these criticisms?


You're grasping at straws and pulling cheapshots now, none of which are even remotely relevant to the CSM, but I guess I'll answer them anyway. First, just like the efforts of Agony Empire, RvB, Tuskers, Vengance INC, Stille Gewalt, Furtherance, et al, NPSI communities have been formed and managed by corporations since the very beginning. SASH started Spectre Fleet, and for a long time the only FCs in Spectre Fleet were the FCs from my corporation. That is no longer the case, but that's how we had to do it to get things started. As for ownership of the community, at the end of the day I own the channel, the mailing lists, the teamspeak server, website.... I own everything because someone has to. If you find some other way of running an NPSI community, please let me know. Otherwise, I'll simply let the results of my methods speak for themselves.

My title is a reference to the hyperbolic statement "literally hitler," and it's a joke. Get over yourself.

I have literally never heard about our corporation being called "more of a corp than a cult" so I'm just going to assume you made that up. Internally we have a joke that SASH is an "elitist social club," which originated during the early days of our corporation when we did nothing but run with Spectre Fleet. The members of my corporation were so focused on building up Spectre Fleet to be a successful community that we didn't do anything together as a corp, at all.

Thankfully those days are over and we can fly together as a corp more often now. Not sure what else you're looking for here.

Quote:
Last election year you were listed as a candidate on the official CFC ballot. Even with the CFC's backing you failed to take a position on the CSM but my question is how can you talk yourself up as a person of the NPSI community when you seem to be sitting in the same corner with one of the major nullsec blocs? What assurances do we have as the voter?


This sounds like a regurgitation of Gevlon Goblin's election analysis. I was far from the only non-CFC member listed on the official CFC ballot, most notably Ali Aras was prominently included. To say that I failed "even with the CFC's backing" is a bit presumptuous. I was quite low on the CFC official ballot last year and was eliminated before any of those votes trickled down. I have never been in any CFC affiliated alliances, or any nullbloc for that matter. I was included on the official ballot for other reasons, reasons that I would like to think included my writings and technical knowledge of Eve, which has been showcased in my various articles on TheMittani.com.

Quote:
Lastly, none of your suggestions really bring anything to the game.


Everyone is entitled to their own opinion - and I'm sure that those who agree with me, instead of you, will show it with their vote.

Okay, now that that is finally over with, let me reiterate. Even if you respond (which I'm sure you will) I will not be humouring you with any more answers in this thread, bar none. You tried desperately last year to derail my CSM campaign thread, and succeeding in getting it locked, forcing me to recreate it. You tried to get me banned from the game by posting articles on EN24, and your posts here are nothing but a continuation of your obsessive vendetta against me.

I look forward to your next article on EN24.

It won't stop me.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
Robyn Aurilen
Sanctuary of Shadows
#37 - 2015-01-06 23:53:59 UTC
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Jayne Fillon R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
+1 vote, confirmed cult status cuz seraph said so
Creeping Kaos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#38 - 2015-01-06 23:54:39 UTC
Once again, eloquently made his points and remained respectful till the end. What more do you need from a candidate.

+1 my vote

> To walk fully in the light, one must first be intimate with the dark.
Cee Blue
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#39 - 2015-01-07 00:02:37 UTC
+1 vote for Jayne.

If we are in a cult then why don't all our backgrounds match.. .oh wait..

Can i have some free kool-aid now? You keep promising us.
Lex Arson
Adversity.
Psychotic Tendencies.
#40 - 2015-01-07 00:46:08 UTC
I think as we all saw from Matias's run last year, founding a Thing that is successful does not necessarily grant you any credentials that makes you useful on the CSM. Your ideas might be nice, but as before stated they add very little to the actual game as far as the grand scheme of things is concerned. You now have your own corp rallying around this thread blotting it out with worthless noise. I've been a CEO longer than you've been playing this game and I wouldn't count this towards credentials to being a contributing CSM member.

vOv Vote for jayne if you want another Matias I suppose. CCP will not care about the topics you bring to the table and you will contribute nothing to the discussions that others will bring to the table. GL in your run.

There's no use crying after every mistake, you just keep on trying 'til you run out of cake.