Jita Park Speakers Corner

Accountabilty doesnt exist in EvE.

Off topic posts removed. Stay on topic please.

If a person can post on this forum, then they have shown sufficient evidence to hold a valid account.

The constitution then affords for people to make contributions, it does not stipulate anything concerning the use of alternative characters:

( http://www.eveonline.com/download/devblog/CSM.pdf )

"In the spirit of encouraging as much debate and discussion as possible, any voter may present any topic at any time in this forum, and there is no limit to the number of topics they can introduce—as long as they are genuine, relevant, and well articulated. In addition, they may participate in as many existing topics opened by fellow voters as they please. The burden of demonstrating the legitimacy or urgency of the issue rests with the voters themselves. A good idea will generate momentum all on its own, and it is the task of the CSM to not only track these discussions, but to engage the populace as much as possible in the interest of sustaining that momentum until the issue is brought to closure."

"Voter Eligibility

Anyone who has held an EVE Online account for a full thirty (30) days, and said account is active, is eligible to vote. Only one vote per account—not per character—is permitted. The thirty-day account exclusion rule is to limit undue metagaming influence in the election, and is in line with the precepts of a modern democracy that imposes a minimum age for voting privileges. The only exclusion rule for voting is CCP employee accounts, which are ineligible. Affiliates, volunteers, partners, and interns are permitted to vote."


If you can prove my account is invalid to vote then I will ask for the post to be censored accordingly myself, otherwise please refrain from spamming with unconfirmed opinionated beleifs. Happy for a CCP moderator to access my details as applicable purely for the legitamate purposes of confirming the validity as a voter, if it helps.

Considering that the ownership of the records is in fact public and not the CSM council, can I ask that you attempt to improve the record keeping.

Your argument does not remove the possibility of accurate minute keeping. (The beer might of course )

However can I suggest that since this is a stipulated requirement of the CCP rulings then perhaps ask CCP to provide an appropriate minute taker for use?

I have to agree Selene, the idea of CCP stipulating "public" ownership but then not making the details "public" actually seems a tad contradictory and doesn't afford accountability to the average player imho.

However, I do respect the intention of why they are protecting the anonyimity of the council members in principal, but does throw some doubt into the credibility of CCP's own desire with transparency at the same time. I can see the pros and cons for both sides. At least I suppose we can tell from individual accounts elsewhere who in fact favours an open relationship with the players.

Interesting that it isn't just an administration competency as your colleague identified. And whilst it might seem harsh for a computer game, it does give some indication to the level of determination afforded to the issue/role perhaps?

If not too overbearing could CCP be approached to reconsider their stance on this, as I'd still prefer accurate reflective minutes, and at the end of the day, if they say no, they say no.

I love when people pull statements like that out of their opposite end. Ownership, I guess, is that of CCP. CCP may make it public, if they'd wish to, but will probably not - NDA and stuff.

Very, very true. this is a game owned by CCP and the CSM exists at its whim. They could, and probably should, pull the plug whenever they feel fit to do so. The CSM idea was good but it has no honest brokers. The actual roll of the CSM is either unclear or at least not binding to any party and therefore ineffective. The CSM is a focus group for whatever they feel like focusing on. They are not under any obligation to improve anything for anyone and it seems they, as a group, are running with that. Since CCP is not familiar with their product, they probably have to take what the CSM puts out as fact. I would be grreatly suprised if they ever fact checked what they were told. These days its almost exclusively null sec alliance buffs and a PvP-only EVE. the rest of the game gets a nerf or, if they're lucky, ignored. Since the voting system is what it is, we can expect it to stay the same for as long as the CSM concept lasts or null sec gets bored with it.

Since they can say anything and there is nothing available to disprove it, then there is no accountability. That's where we are now. Who knows what gets said or done. frankly, who cares anymore. People shouldn't expect the game to be any better than the lives they really live in.

realistically, even if notes of who-said-what were releasedyou still wouldn't know if anything released was actually said. The idea of accountability is well out of the question.

CCP doesn't have to release anything. CSM can say whatever they want since they aren't held to even working on the game if they so choose. Does the CSM serve it's own interests? Absolutely. Does it serve the player base? Depends. If you live in null in a big alliance, yes. If you don't, then no. They are not obligated to so much as return a phone call or emaikl from CCP so why should any of them so much as look for good ideas for anything other than what they want to do? Nobody owes the players anything, no matter what game you play.

This also means that the CSM is ultimately just a PR stund that they would have a tough time backing out of. They made a big deal out of it and the game media agreed it was a good thing. They can do what they like, but that looks bad. They can't disband it easily without a publicity problem, but they can pretend to listen to the peasants every now and then.

Like I said earlier, CCP isn't very familiar with how their product is used so its always going to be a crap shoot about what they want to use to seem like they care what the masses think.

The bulk of everything going on these days was in the forums for years. The current list of ideas from the notes are what null sec NAP fest want. The rest of EVE is in a real fix becauseanything left over has either the appearance of shooting from the hip or even malicious destruction. Whatever.

The point is, who cares? Your interests or mine are not the interests of CCP or the CSM. They serve themselves, and why not? I would love to see it be different but that would not be in line with how this "community" works. EVE is not a very good game and it isn't getting better. No time soon anyway.

So replacing "someone" with a "name" is really going to expand the document writing so much?

I would hope you have a least some affinity with the other council members to do this? You do seem to use the term friendly teamwork alot, which kind of makes me beleive recognition is feasible.

If your heard it to write it, I doubt it's that bad you can't identify the speaker, if so then yes you definatley need to improve your technology. I personally wouldn't see this as being a majorly expensive investment. I'm sure CCP might even be able to loan you some of these assests for these purposes, I'd hope so anyhow.

And like I said, CCP stipulates the ruling, I don't see why approching them for the resources to carry it out effectively is so unreasonable as I suggested above.

Technical obstacles doesn't seem a valid argument to me. Especially if you haven't even tried to improve them yet.

As I have explained several times, it is often very difficult, if not impossible, to figure out who is talking. The camera is on the conference table, and it's pointed at the end where the devs sit. Only one or two CSM's are visible in the video.

Even if we had proper coverage (at a minimum 2 cameras in opposite corners of the room; I've explained to CCP what would be needed, and I've done multicamera taping and editing in RL), it would still take a fair amount of extra time. And remember guys, we are volunteers, in many cases burning vacation days to go to Iceland plus evenings/weekends to prep the minutes.

Several CSMs -- myself included -- have already taken the time to clarify details upon specific request. If that is not good enough for you, I'm sorry, but we have to strike a balance.