CSM Campaigns

From those stats, it's obviously Xenuria.

Thanks for the confidence, but Denmark doesn't allow write-in candidates.
Would be hella-sweet if Alphea got elected though, I'm sure she'd raise all kinds of hell in Parliament.

So, election is over, it's time for evaluation of what went well and what went badly.
Will we see any evaluation from Xenuria? Or will we see another candidacy for CSM 11, with the same unappealing (And in many ways, dishonest, fantasy-based and offputting) platform and the same, predictable election result?

Oh, and if anyone knows where to get the numbers, how many voted for Xenuria as their first choice? I need something to set as a personal minimum (Since the actual minimum of local votes includes party votes and votes for other candidates). *
C'mon Xenuria, you have tried to play the strong-man-card here, the all-knowing, superior election-campaign-machine with an infallible platform that doesn't allow for further questions. Let's see how you hold up against someone who does this for both study and 'living'.
(Okay, 'living' needs more quotationmarks, it's pretty hyperbolic since it's only an expenses-paid-for kind of deal.)

Let's shake hands on this bet.
I raise you 1 ISK, your space-honour and that you have to answer all questions in your candidacy thread next time you run, and that answer cannot be in the "check OP/platform post" or "I refuse to answer because of [reasons]" - but copy-paste of earlier answers to same types of questions is fine.
What will you demand of me? Mention in my speeches? Naked Twitch-streaming? Saluting Fat Bee? (Okay, not that last one, I do have standards...)

Let's do it, politicians' honour.



*Actual goals will be set on sane conditions, not internet bets.

Do you also predict it will be hot in Florida in July?

1) The election seems to be representative of those who voted.
2) Xenuria - With all respect. No matter how good, correct or righteous your platform is (or is not), people won't elect someone they don't like or identify with. A study of democratic politics shows this. You need to either re-invent yourself to the current voting population (who apparently don't agree with your position), change your position (and approach since it seems to turn people off), mobilize the non-voting mass's behind your 'disenfranchised' revolution, or start planning Xenuria CSM 11, 12, 13, etc. campaign.

Xenuria has started the next campaign, so I think it holds water.
And while I hate to be "that person", source?

Of course, running on a platform of "outsider" will attract likeminded people. In a regular democracy, outsiders might also be able to change the system a little, it's just a shame that this isn't a regular democracy.
Xenuria would have bleated about "change" and the 13 other CSMs would actually improve the game. Whenever CCP would ask Xenuria about something game-related, he'd default to someone who knew the subject at hand, as he stated earlier in this thread.
Xenuria, if true to his word, would become an empty seat, solving only Xenurias ego-problem, namely the problem that Xenuria can't get elected to CSM.

And of course, Xenuria changes positions between each CSM election, it's just a matter of whatever new dumb idea he thinks will solve his problem.

You know what's pitiful? An in-crowd so terrified of reform that they take steps to disenfranchise people who represent a threat to their world view. Reform will happen with or without me, that much is certain. Your efforts are in vain.

If you would like to have this conversation outside the eve forums I would be happy to indulge you. So long as it's entirety is recorded and made available unedited to the masses.

I would prefer a level playing field, in the eve forums there are things I am not allowed to talk about, but you already knew that.
You aim to bait me into violating the forum rules and removing myself as a threat. I might be socially naive but I am not stupid.

If you honestly want to open a dialog which you have probably ascertained would implicate you, than we must do so outside the forums. If my claims hold no truth to them, what have you to fear from this?

That course of action is being considered. Trust me when I say that if I decide to go forward with that, you will be one of the first to know.

Your argument is logical but ultimately based on false information. I am not dishonest, I am brutally honest. My ego is not important to the CSM or to CCP. In fact my ego is not even relevant to the discussion. Constantly bringing up "ego" as a retort to my platform says more about you and the caricatures you are perpetuated than it does me or my platform.

I would also remind you that if you want to accuse me of something as you have a habit of doing than you could at least provide some proof of your claims. You come off as a troll at worst and a well meaning hypocrite at best when you shout for evidence while simultaneous providing none when the burden of proof rests on you to do so. I already cited my sources, were are yours?