These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

"That" time of year again.

First post
Author
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#181 - 2016-01-13 23:44:45 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Back on track:

My experience of crossing High Sec multiple times and talking to people was that they didn't know the CSM existed nor what it does.

That is what is relevant.



Your anecdote is what is relevant? Ugh
You didn't know? Evidence is actually just plural of anecdotes that you really wish to be true...

Although it does generally fit with my own anecdotes. The CSM seems to be of interest to bigger groups, space-politics-groups and groups with more emphasis on "serious" EVE and meta-play, so I do think knowledge of the CSM is more prevalent among larger WH, low- and nullsec groups (Though I have no way of knowing this for certain). Right or wrong, the low voter turnout is a symptom of bad things, and if that is due to lack of the most basic knowledge (That an election is happening and you have a voting right), then that should be rectified.
The way to rectify it is to make sure all players know there's an election going on, such as sending out EVE-mails, using splash banners or posting dev.blogs, all three are things CCP have done before. At that point, it's hard to tell whether people don't know, or don't care, when it comes to voting. The way not to rectify it is to disenfranchise groups where you think voter turnout is proportionally higher, just to curb some groups' electoral successes compared to other groups.

To really say anything with confidence, however, we need data that I haven't seen, and might not exist. What we're doing is guessing and trying out 'common sense'-arguments, which is why I'd be very careful about stating anything categorically.
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#182 - 2016-01-13 23:50:59 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:
Alphea Abbra wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Right right, so not an alt with an agenda, at all.
Who would I be an alt of, and what would that change? I'm almost genuinely curious, because I can't see why it has anything to do with the arguments I make, or the lack of evidence for Jenshae Chiropteras claims.

Still, I'm not. You can ask my corporate leadership if you really want to - but naturally they could also be in on the conspiracy?!? -, or I could care enough to explain my life story - a story I've prepared already and simply made up?!? -, or more appropiately, you could tell me why it'd change one bit, and thus why we'd need to care at all. After showing that, you could show what evidence there is for it. You might want to top it by having dinner at Milliways.


Because it's funny how people who you never see posting all of a sudden come out of the woodwork for very specific threads and uses, frantically and feverishly debating points for a specific faction.
Being unsubbed for about a year will have that effect, but I don't debate for a specific faction. I argue against a specific type of loon, but that's because I put reason and evidence in high regard. Still, nice try. 3/10 - next time, try to half-answer a few points, and you might keep it going for longer. Smile
Jenshae Chiroptera
#183 - 2016-01-14 00:00:29 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Back on track:
My experience of crossing High Sec multiple times and talking to people was that they didn't know the CSM existed nor what it does.
That is what is relevant.
Your anecdote is what is relevant? Ugh
... and you have done what exactly? Blink

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

SurrenderMonkey
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#184 - 2016-01-14 01:22:06 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Back on track:
My experience of crossing High Sec multiple times and talking to people was that they didn't know the CSM existed nor what it does.
That is what is relevant.
Your anecdote is what is relevant? Ugh
... and you have done what exactly? Blink


Illustrated that you are incapable of factually supporting your claims.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Jenshae Chiroptera
#185 - 2016-01-14 20:10:28 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Illustrated that you are incapable of factually supporting your claims.
So nothing but hot air that is against all EVE players knowing about CSM ...?
Well ... whose interests does that serve?
You look a bit of a git at the moment. Blink

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#186 - 2016-01-14 20:13:17 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Illustrated that you are incapable of factually supporting your claims.
So nothing but hot air that is against all EVE players knowing about CSM ...?
Well ... whose interests does that serve?
You look a bit of a git at the moment. Blink


75% of EVE players disagree!

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#187 - 2016-01-14 20:22:13 UTC
As I said, I'd be happy to see CCP do something to inform more people of the CSM. Mainly because I know it won't make a difference.

After is doesn't make a difference (because EVERY voting system ever conceived favors the organized and interested/willing to vote people over the disorganized and apathetic/unwilling to vote even if you paid them people), you and folks like you will identify yet another series of (conspiracy laden) reasons why it didn't work, instead of realizing that the problem wasn't some cfc conspiracy or CCP action or lack of general knowledge about the CSM.

The actual issue here is that people just simply reject your beliefs and goals and will continue to do that no matter what.
SurrenderMonkey
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#188 - 2016-01-14 20:31:13 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Illustrated that you are incapable of factually supporting your claims.
So nothing but hot air that is against all EVE players knowing about CSM ...?
Well ... whose interests does that serve?
You look a bit of a git at the moment. Blink


You made an assertion.

I asked you to support that assertion.

You posted "evidence" that conclusively disproved your assertion.

You then said that the evidence doesn't matter, only your anecdotal tale of high-sec political missionary work does.

How do you imagine that I have, in any way, argued against "All Eve players knowing about the CSM?"

My problem is that you're making things up and expecting them to be regarded as fact, even when you are provably lying. Roll

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#189 - 2016-01-14 20:35:47 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Illustrated that you are incapable of factually supporting your claims.
So nothing but hot air that is against all EVE players knowing about CSM ...?
Well ... whose interests does that serve?
You look a bit of a git at the moment. Blink


You made an assertion.

I asked you to support that assertion.

You posted "evidence" that conclusively disproved your assertion.

You then said that the evidence doesn't matter, only your anecdotal tale of high-sec political missionary work does.

How do you imagine that I have, in any way, argued against "All Eve players knowing about the CSM?"

My problem is that you're making things up and expecting them to be regarded as fact, even when you are provably lying. Roll



Jenshae, everybody. Give her poorly informed and articulated anger at something or other other a big hand!

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

ISD Buldath
#190 - 2016-01-14 22:43:10 UTC
Quote:
27. Off-topic posting is prohibited.

Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued to the off-topic poster.


I have removed some off topic Posts, and those quoiting them.

~ISD Buldath

Instructor King of the Forums! Knight of the General Discussion

Support, Training and Resources Division

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to EVE-Mails regarding forum moderation.

Jenshae Chiroptera
#191 - 2016-01-14 23:25:45 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
... her ... anger ...
Hmm? Did someone tell you that this is anger when you were a kid? Smile

Malcanis, I think if it did come out that CSM were voted for by an informed minority, it might make you being in CSM and your input modestly questionable as CCP could have been steered in the wrong direction for years. Blink

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Seven Koskanaiken
Shadow Legions.
#192 - 2016-01-15 04:11:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Seven Koskanaiken
Selling the CSM to the eve playerbase should be easier than selling water in the desert, a "virtual space council" is exactly the sort of pretentious turgid horseshit that your typical overprivileged nerd creams themselves for, regardless of what area of space they play in, the fact they're even playing this ******* game in any capacity should qualify them as at least potentially interested in ~a space election~. If CCP can barely scrape a 10% turnout for it then they've been doing something wrong.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#193 - 2016-01-15 04:40:49 UTC
Seven Koskanaiken wrote:
Selling the CSM to the eve playerbase should be easier than selling water in the desert, a "virtual space council" is exactly the sort of pretentious turgid horseshit that your typical overprivileged nerd creams themselves for, regardless of what area of space they play in, the fact they're even playing this ******* game in any capacity should qualify them as at least potentially interested in ~a space election~. If CCP can barely scrape a 10% turnout for it then they've been doing something wrong.


Your mistake is assuming you know enough about the player base and the individuals with minds of their own within it to form this conclusions.

Which explains why you're in NC. - nothing but fail over there. Perpetual fail Roll

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#194 - 2016-01-15 07:04:27 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
I think if it did come out that CSM were voted for by an informed minority, it might make you being in CSM and your input modestly questionable as CCP could have been steered in the wrong direction for years. Blink
Okay, so as usual, you make a number of mistakes here.
"If it did come out" shouldn't be an "if". It's known, and has been for each year CCP has released the election results. You're trying to fabricate a conspiracy, while the only reason you know anything at all is because CCP released the information in public.
"informed" should be "interested". To be informed takes clicking a splash page link and 5 minutes. Those who do are interested, those who don't aren't, but nothing is hidden away.
"make ... your input ... questionable" is dishonest and deceptive, seemingly based on your anger at being rejected yourself (While that is entirely, purely and 100% your own fault as a poor candidate).
"CCP could have been steered..." is wrong. CSM doesn't steer.

And again, most fundamentally, is your opposition to democracy. Wanting to disenfranchise one group for the audacity that you perceive them to vote more than others, is not the right way to go. You don't become more electable by removing voters, except by comparison to more succesful candidates whose voters you might remove.
Being engaged in a democratic election entails accepting the judgement of the voters. You can't simply decide to make up a new electorate because the old one didn't vote like you wanted, and trying to limit opposing votes isn't democratic.
Kiandoshia
Likely Suspects
RAZOR Alliance
#195 - 2016-01-15 07:22:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Kiandoshia
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:

Arrow CCP could put CSM info into Local same as a MoTD


I hope they don't. Some people just don't care about it. I think it is being thrown at us enough in order to figure out how to vote if we can be arsed to.

Actually, wait, I am going about this all wrong!

What are CSM votes worth? Maybe I can sell mine.
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
#196 - 2016-01-15 09:01:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
Kiandoshia wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:

Arrow CCP could put CSM info into Local same as a MoTD


I hope they don't. Some people just don't care about it. I think it is being thrown at us enough in order to figure out how to vote if we can be arsed to.

Actually, wait, I am going about this all wrong!

What are CSM votes worth? Maybe I can sell mine.


I can buy it so you dont have to vote, for 1 000 000 ISK. Just send me your corpse. Units: 1. I will use it for ancient minmatar Doodoo rituals if I see you voting.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#197 - 2016-01-16 13:03:08 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
... her ... anger ...
Hmm? Did someone tell you that this is anger when you were a kid? Smile

Malcanis, I think if it did come out that CSM were voted for by an informed minority, it might make you being in CSM and your input modestly questionable as CCP could have been steered in the wrong direction for years. Blink


I'm largely (although not completely) happy with the direction they've taken in recent years. With two notable exceptions (WiS, Hi-sec reform) - one of which is not one that they're ever likely to be in a position to deliver anyway - CCP have given me everything I wanted from them. And I bet Hi-sec is pretty high up on the "To Do" list once Citadels and Gates goes live.

In fact one of my biggest disappointments about being elected to the CSM was that one of the two issues that I intended to push the hardest was basically the first thing that they put in front of us at the summit.

However, that was more than made up for by being able to relentlessly argue for the desperate need for power projection changes. And then being able to call attention to possible solutions being proposed by people who are clever than me.

The people who voted for me were in no doubt about what they'd be getting, and what was delivered by CCP was substantially what I wanted. "Steered in the wrong direction", you say?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Jenshae Chiroptera
#198 - 2016-01-17 22:45:31 UTC
Sorry, I forgot about this thread.
Alphea Abbra wrote:
... To be informed takes clicking a splash page link and 5 minutes. ...
Two days during the working week last year?
In a launcher that many of us by-pass?
Malcanis wrote:
"Steered in the wrong direction", you say?
Good response.
Personally, I like Phoebe, less hot dropping going on all over the place.
If the vision ever comes true then EVE would see more strategy.
Others hate the changes and have quit the game over it. Can't please everyone and will always lose some. How many left, I don't know.

Steering in the wrong direction may well be the Null Sec focus and coming at it from the wrong approach. The priority might have been better on High Sec, where the majority are.
Sure, they only stick around for a year and a half on average and I can see the logic in trying to get more of them out to Null Sec to then stay longer.

However, Fozzie's team have sacrificed depth while trying to reduce complexity. Their dream of little groups taking space and blooming in Null Sec have not been realised.
Why not?
I think it is because Null Sec is a tough place to live, it is like a surface rock that smaller groups can't always penetrate to get to the water and soil beneath.

As EVE stands today, I would recommend that any new corp gets jump clones on opposite sides of High Sec, levels their PVE ships, sticks to one tank type and when ready move into a Class 2 or Class 3 worm hole.
There is far better access control with worm holes and it can be an incubator to build wealth and skill points as a group, being able to lay down an infrastructure.
. The trouble at this point is that if you recruit people, you usually need to trust them. If you have a weak time zone they can sneak enemies into your worm hole and you can lose your system. So you can't really grow well in numbers. It is a much larger risk than High Sec or even Low Sec in some regards.
So, if you look at worm holes and Null Sec, all you can really do is have more worm holes, have one for newbies, have drama, have POSes in there blown up and keep going up the WH classes.

Even when you get to Class 6 and a fairly established corp or alliance, you are now left with the people who like worm holes and people who like blingy ships in moderately sized engagement.

There is no natural leap from Worm Holes to Null Sec.


It can work as an incubator but it is not the best solution. There is also a great deal that can and is in many cases being done socially to try and build more new players in Null Sec. The trouble is that they are usually being built by the larges coalitions and not by smaller entities.

Anyway, I am rambling on uselessly and anyone reading up to the point of this last paragraph has probably had their eyes glaze over and their minds' switch off.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#199 - 2016-01-17 23:02:34 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:


However, Fozzie's team have sacrificed depth while trying to reduce complexity. Their dream of little groups taking space and blooming in Null Sec have not been realised.
Why not?
I think it is because Null Sec is a tough place to live, it is like a surface rock that smaller groups can't always penetrate to get to the water and soil beneath.


I strongly disagree with the first part of that, and somewhat agree with the second.

The map is evidently (a word which the much missed Sir Pterry reminds us means " that which is seen " vastly more diverse than it was on the 26th of November 2014. There are still coalitions. There are also small groups, new alliances, independent projects like the PFR, and enough empty space for any new group that wants to try its hand at homesteading. And we have seen conclusively proved that Aegis sov does not allow even the largest group on the map to come and evict a region-sized group in a weekend. Or even a week. Nor does it allow them to easily keep them out of that space without constant effort.

And yeah nullsec is a tough place to live. It requires a level of group co-operation and co-ordination that is simply in a different league to that which is needed in hi-sec. It is now; it was ever thus. On the plus side, the tools to facilitate this are far more effective than they were in 2006 when I started; Jump Freighters, wormholes, covops-cloaked BRs, travel inties - in many ways these new guys have it so easy!
On the other hand, if the tools they have to climb that mountain are much better, the mountains they have to climb are much higher. Even the scrubbiest groups in 0.0 are better organised and have access to better doctrines than the average 2006 nullsec alliance.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Jenshae Chiroptera
#200 - 2016-01-17 23:46:42 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
... I strongly disagree with the first part of that, and somewhat agree with the second.....
What you quoted and this are not clear.

Entosis:
Waving a mining laser at a structure from a little ship.
No longer is there time saving and cost / benefits to stacking your fleet for DPS to grind down a structure. That is one aspect of depth that has been lost.
No longer do you need to put a 100 man fleet out there to be attacked. You can simply send out some T3Ds to kill the annoying interceptors.

... and boy can you farm the little groups now.
Want to really make them unwelcome? Just drop capital blobs around that they can't break and tag team the entosis work.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.