Jita Park Speakers Corner

Fair enough.
I think that the idea of bloc-voting for Hi-Sec is the idea that this thread has right, and it's something that should be supported. The individual campaign that VoR is running, I don't know so much. But simply put, Hi-sec has no explicit candidate on the CSM, even Trebor (whilst my favourite candidate since DV left) is only hi-sec friendly, rather than a hi-sec advocate. Hi-sec needs a way to push back against the null-heavy bias in the CSM right now, a bias you (compliments where it's due) engineered to counter a previous anti-null bias on the CSM. We've still got an unbalanced CSM who does good things sometimes and other times craps on a whole section of the player base they do not understand, it's just backwards now.

hisec does have a bloc candidate, that'll be kelduum, which will severely disrupt the attempt to organize non-aligned hisec votes among issler, t'amber, trebor and any other serious hisec person who throws their hat into the ring

the interests of goonswarm and eve uni are almost identical (newbies, newbies, newbies) so i'm looking forward to working with kelduum on NPE issues

anyway if you want to make this VOR thing go anywhere you'll need to have one candidate instead of three

Do you foresee butting heads with Kelduum given that CCP has stated that wardec mechanics are possibly on the agenda for the summer?

Hi-Sec deserves more than one candidate, really. It's a major part of the game.
W-Space deserves at least one candidate, and low-sec NEEDS one.

This would be a very effective strategy for empire voters. Given that The Mittani will win a council seat regardless, along with a strong likelihood of the remaining 6 seats being filled with incumbents, empire voters could instead focus on taking away his chairman seat as check and balance to the Goon's power.

Houm, probably Issler is the one working harder for a candidacy. I was challenged earlier to become candidate, but that's nothing I will do. I am old and smart enough to know I don't have the kind of skills needed for such a task.
I picture myself as either a right hand or a thinking head to aid the guy with the charisma and the social skills, but never the guy in open light.

So, putting it short, if Issler forwards, I will vote him unless he does something that scares me.

BTW, mobilyze people against someone is a hard trick to pull and usually backfires; voting against Mittani or nullsec blocs should not be the strategy. People should vote for what they will get, more hisec, WiS, lowsec, mining, you name it.

In fact, we should NOT talk at all about nullsec: there's the whole damned CSM6 to do so.

When WE talk about THEM, then THEY become the hot topic and nobody talks about US...

There's no denying that CSM6 could have done a better job overall. However, this CSM and any that follow are not organized along the lines of the old way of doing things where they had regular 'formal meetings' and actually voted on proposals and recorded the votes and threw spoons at each other, etc... We got on Skype, hashed out strategies for various issues and executed plans in one-tenth the time of the old way of doing things. The old way is GONE. It's not coming back because it was grossly inefficient for actually getting **** done.

I cannot speak for other CSM's (in)ability to talk to players, but I try to answer every eve-mail I've gotten over the past year on CSM issues. I've gone on EVE Radio, talked to whoever asked for my time when I had time. I've blogged about every summit I've been to in detail, along with all the other major events of the past year. I don't blog often but when I do, I try to make it informative and worth your time and I make it a personal policy to at least try to take even frothing at the mouth rage freaks semi-seriously. It may not qualify as 'regular' communication but it's often better than 'official' information channels as well.



I'm willing to wager I have a pretty good understanding of both, including a fair idea of how my former co-workers prefer to phase things in over time versus the random ~awesome~ idiocy that plagued so much of CSM6's term. You are also WAY over-simplifying and out-right ignoring statements, blogs and forum posts that several CSM's including myself have put out clarifying some of the things you are upset about.



Obviously I disagree, and not just for myself. You can't throw a blanket at 14 people (yes, CSM 6 is actually FOURTEEN players) and say this. It's just ridiculous and makes you look radical and spergy m8.



For better or worse, Mittens is probably going to be the CSM7 Chair. Unless he's caught on film literally grilling live kittens for his puppy to eat, it's pretty much a done deal. I was the #2 vote getter in the last election by a fair margin and Mittens still had over 1200 votes more than I did. He's got too much organization and too many people that his particular 'style' appeals to, not to mention Goons will not be splitting their vote this time around.

If you want a seat at the table, you are going to have to focus hard and not dilute your potential votes. Even if you succeed, you also need to find someone that not only represents your interests but also has the social skills to communicate those interests effectively to both his/her fellow CSMers AND CCP as well. Food for thought. v0v

if you think that the source of my power and influence comes from the title rather than social skills, i don't even know what to say

BTW, what I find interesting is how the CSM6 no longer pretends to represent *all* players... apparently those who bother to talk, only do so to claim "Hey, good luck making yourself heard, we are not going to fukking care of you non-nullsec sukkers".

But then...

If I am right and I fail, then there will not be any EVE left for me to play...

If I am wrong, then there will not be any EVE left for me to play...

And in any case, I am not paying this game any longer.

the voices in his head