EVE General Discussion

Anyone else finds this reply to mkint (one of the most negative posters to ever roam these forums) hilarious?

And to the OP: I agree, apart from the support of the RP crowd, but that wasn't your main point. I think people should realize that CSM genuinely wants to see EVE get better, that's why they are spending time working on stuff they are not paid for. If you have a well-reasoned proposal on an aspect of EVE which is interesting to you, go take it to them, you may find someone to take it up and advocate it further. If you fundamentally disagree with everyone and their dog on CSM, go vote. It's really that simple.

And to those shouts about vocal minority: that linked graph actually shows that the proverbial high sec-er (defined as a character belonging to a player who doesn't live outside of high sec on at least one character) is actually the minority.

What's wrong?

This is EvE. CSM is EvE.

They do what they are left to do and in favour of those who elected them (hot news, it's like RL politics).


Since this is EvE, anyone who does not like what CSM decides, should fight their way into it and steer it to represent his interest.

Sitting in a forum crying won't change anything. Gotta dirty yer hands and do your sh!t.

@Shazzam Vokanavom

Sorry, I ran out of steam last night, but in regard to your post #34, I much prefer your quotes. Please disregard my earlier seppuku. :/

You make the point that we were both striving for far more clearly. I agree with you and your statement of "the CSM should afford interest to all players in the collective benefits of EvE"

Also this: "Seeing the big picture—in this case, the needs of a society with over 300.000 individuals—is the primary responsibility of a CSM Representative"

In fact, especially that. As much as I appreciate that one of the jewels in EVE's crown is null-sec and that quite rightly needs love (treaties, Dominion pt.2 etc), I wouldn't want CCP to devote all of its development resources to that. Clearly, the stated intent of addressing Faction Warfare is an example of the recognition that there are players beyond the sov-war crowd. My purpose was and is to press that angle and encourage others to do the same.

It is a numbers game and if enough numbers get behind any issue, the CSM must back it.



Good points, I agree CCP should (and I think are) approach(ing) issues cautiously but even-handedly. I hope they don't play it entirely safe and only appease the null-sec clique, but other sectors need to voice their opinions to ensure they don't.

Your comment on the CSM may be true, but I'd certainly agree it would be great if you followed the issues more closely yourself and formed your own opinion.



Thanks for noticing. ;)

Also thank you for understanding the principle I was striving to get across. The encouragement of communities beyond the null-sec elite *is* the lifeblood of EVE as much as sov-war is. But players supporting those "minority interests" need to get behind the CSM and communicate with them.

Personally, I think the immersion storyline aspect is important, both as a marketing tool to attract new players and to provide a bit of depth and soul to the player experience. But I respect that many players don't care for it. It's do think its a shame as many are quick to dismiss some fantastic details "roleplay", when by default pretending to fly around in pretend spaceships is RPing to a degree anyway. But this is a discussion for another thread ;)

Lately, reading Ripard Teg's blog, I think he'd disagree and add "Hey, my blog is the best avenue of influence that we have."

Well, you're on the EVE-O forums. I hope this isn't the high point of your day.

That Mittens quote right there about not representing everyone is why this CSM thing should just stop. It was a good idea but its gone horribly wrong. However, this is EVE where good ideas come to die.

I voted for you and Trebor too (I had just 2 accounts at the time for all you math wizards out there.).

Seleene, thanks for stopping by.

I'd be interested to know what your thoughts are on the current and/or future CSM's ability to effectively represent and champion sectors of the playerbase (and therefore elements of the EVE gameplay sandbox) with which they have little or no personal experience.

Assuming the null-sec bloc continues to maintain it's voting stranglehold, how could these "minority interest" groups best make their case to the incumbents?

[quote=Pavel Bidermann]That Mittens quote right there about not representing everyone is why this CSM thing should just stop. It was a good idea but its gone horribly wrong{/quote]

I think we should get rid of ALL forms of government in the real world because no politician represents everyone

If the current dynamic of the CSM continues, which it should, then it just comes down to being able to listen / defer to other CSM members that know the subject matter better. CSM 6 was a lot more diverse than some might believe but we learned each others strengths and weaknesses early on. This was one of the main reasons that the whole 'alternate' title became pretty irrelevant this time around.



Get to know the front runners and make your voting choice accordingly based on substance. As for getting your views across, It's quite easy to get a hold of most of us. I tend to get a few eve mails a week on something CSM related. I can only speak for myself but I only ignore people that seem hell bent on self destructing their own arguments by frothing at the mouth. Anyone that bothers to contact me with a lucid question / request I try to follow up on. I try to reply / follow up as best I can and so do the others. Most importantly, don't let your opinion be influenced by labels or assumptions. This idea that CSM members ignore people or are untouchable is just wrong in most cases.

Cheers Seleene. I have more questions since we have your attention, I'd be grateful if you (or any of your CSM colleagues) could throw us a few answers:

• How would you describe the performance of the CSM in this past year?


• Has it been effective behind closed doors? How would you describe the working relationship with CCP? Is there any resentment?


• Would you say that the existing CSM team is a "dream team" or could you strengthen the squad?


• What would you say to those that believe the CSM are claiming credit for events and game improvements they have no right to claim?


• Do you see any value in attempting to give the CSM process a better image amongst the players or are existing incumbents happy to work the system as is?


• What would you foresee the goals and focus of CSM7 to be in the coming year?

Thank you for your time, both in general for the past year and in answering these questions.