Jita Park Speakers Corner

I'm not a long time veteran. ( just over 1 year and 3m in eve) but I do love the game and have contributed to CSM and MD forums in the past. I have made many suggestions for improvement in the game, in the aspects that I am familiar with, and tried to stay clear of topics out of my purview or expertise. I try to keep a level and rational approach to solutions that preserve play balance for all. I am an industrialist in game and work in the financial sector in RL so you can say I have better understanding of markets than most. I think my forum posts over the last year represent who I am more that any self glorifying post will. Would you vote for me? No, yes, all welcome comments. I'm pragmatic so if I see support here then I will seriously consider running. But if not then no harm done, I will continue to enjoy the game as a interested and informed bystander.

Why should the CSM be restructured into delegates representing arbitrary playstyles in a "sandbox" game where "professions" do not exist?

Sicex: No offense taken :)

Andski: I don't see the connection between a sandbox model and having constituencies. If people will identify themselves as primarily a role, maybe a secondary role, and then dabbles in the rest. If you happen to have a character with many equal roles ( you spend 50% of the time pvp and the other 50% industry,) the n the person can choose to which group their vote will count for.
What this all basically strives to achieve is getting CSM staffed with experts in each field. They are supposed to be representatives after all and there is no reason why we need 3 expert pvpers on the council va just 1 and 2 others who are expert market players or factional war veterans etc. What this means is that if some player had a beef with FW they could go appeal to the CSM in charge of FW etc. currently we have CSMs turning a blind eye to many topics because they either have no interest in it or no expertise in it. Just scrape the CSM forum over the last year to see. It's not their fault. Their all pvpers.

If CSM is supposed to be elected representatives then they need people who constituents can trust to weigh their issues in their area of expertise.

I will support you for CSM.

Kaelie don't be disheartened.

Even a week old player who hasnt finished the tutorials would be preferable to some of the existing corrupt members imho. As education to the issues is always a possibility and they may at least still hold the view that the role is about impartial benefit of the game for all EvE players rather than their niche set.

Outright abuse of the process and going for the MetaWin seems to be an addictive habit some CSM members can't break unfortunatley. Like to see a Rehab centre setup to address the issue. But in the meantime affording the problematic members of CSM to a nice long holiday in a detox camp away from CSM duties works just as good for me.

Quoting Incorrect idiot who cannot form any sensible contribution other than a tourettes style insult in the hope it appears effectively intelligent and get a laugh from the other aspects of the EvE community of a maturity with people who normally wet the bed.

Try to remain lucid if you can, I know it can be difficult when punch drunk on the propoganda from the corrupt CSM puppet masters and their slaves.

Reverse psychology therapy aid XBY-14 might help, at least its format might be familiar.

And fyi, my multiple alts will be voting.

Is a MetaWin similar to a Culture win on civilization or something?

Like if someone scores an EVE Online MetaWin, everyone else loses? Given that one can't control all of space or remove all enemy corps, it seems the MetaWin is the best way to achieve ultimate victory.