These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Meissa Anunthiel for CSM 7 - (longest CSM member to date, for a reason)

First post
Author
Gourock
Know-Nothings
I Will End Your Whole....
#21 - 2012-02-12 16:36:03 UTC
"last csm (and in your blog) you wanted a wh stabiliser, no mention of this for this csm have you dropped this idea since 99% wh peopel hated the idea or are you still for this change, if it isnt in the small changes you want, why did you drop the idea"
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#22 - 2012-02-12 23:46:27 UTC
testobjekt wrote:
How can a member of the dreaded CSM5 argue to have any pros?

Dreaded why? because we warned CCP that the development path they had chosen would lead to bad things, and after they failed to address our concerns (which proved to be very spot on), we told you about those very concerns?

It looks to me like we told them exactly what we needed to, and what we warned them would happen did.
I'm not happy about that, but we did what we had to do and could do then.

Or are you refering to the CSM 5 that helped bring you Team BFF?
Or the CSM 5 that got you a bunch of UI improvements?

If that's another CSM 5 you're talking about, I'd like to know which it is.

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#23 - 2012-02-13 00:00:55 UTC
Gourock wrote:
"last csm (and in your blog) you wanted a wh stabiliser, no mention of this for this csm have you dropped this idea since 99% wh peopel hated the idea or are you still for this change, if it isnt in the small changes you want, why did you drop the idea"


As I said in my blog post, I don't care about a stabilizer, I want to see if a way can be found to prevent people from walling themselves in to an extent such that they are safe from harm. No place in Eve should be safe, and that applies to wormholes as well. So I will still check if a solution can be found, I don't give a rat's ass the form it takes. It's easy to go with an idea you have had no detail about other than a name and say it's a bad idea.

Either way, the reason I don't mention it is that it's not high on my agenda, far from it. As I said wormhole work pretty well as they are, other than the list of changes I requested (CHA access rights or personal hangars, clone changing in wormholes, T3 refitting, etc.), those are high on my list and have been since CSM 5 where I first asked CCP to fix them, I haven't stopped asking and won't stop until they get fixed :p

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

roigon
TURN LEFT
HYDRA RELOADED
#24 - 2012-02-13 00:51:58 UTC
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
Gourock wrote:
"last csm (and in your blog) you wanted a wh stabiliser, no mention of this for this csm have you dropped this idea since 99% wh peopel hated the idea or are you still for this change, if it isnt in the small changes you want, why did you drop the idea"


As I said in my blog post, I don't care about a stabilizer, I want to see if a way can be found to prevent people from walling themselves in to an extent such that they are safe from harm.


Can you shortly expand on that. Because while I am no expert, as I see it there is no safe in WH space. Yes given sufficient people you could theoretically keep your WH isolated 24/7 by collapsing every new K162 that appears and not opening your statics.

However, if someone wants you, they can still get you. A sufficiently motivated group can find your WH and bring with it enough firepower to stop you from closing it.

It is just a matter of how much effort each party wants to undertake in either defence or offence. Neither side has a overwhelming advantage. While defence might have the bonus of location and thus hardware, the offensive side has the bonus of time of engagement and as such can dictate when and if the battle happens.
Trytus Tycho
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2012-02-13 01:15:16 UTC
roigon wrote:

However, if someone wants you, they can still get you. A sufficiently motivated group can find your WH and bring with it enough firepower to stop you from closing it.



That's pretty much the problem in a nutshell. There are no sufficient motivations for a group to break a fortress aside from sheer grudge or contract. Opponents that are cornered into a **** cage simply self destructs within the safety of their shield to deny the opposing party any loot or killmails.

To attack a fortress, you have to slowly slip capitals into their systems undetected. This could take weeks of planning depending on how big your corp is. One small screw up and your mark will find you, probe you down, and pick you off while you're completely cutoff from support. I've scouted my share of Russian fortresses. 20 dreadnaughts just floating in a shield, those guys don't even bother to hide the fact that they have valuables in here. Considering that high class static wormholes can fit through 3 capitals at a time before collapsing, how long do you figure before an offending party slips enough in there to start mounting an offensive? Of course to add insult to injury, the entire effort is moot by the end of the day. If your mark doesn't want to give you the satisfaction of looting or killmail whoring, you won't get any. Period.

It would benefit me a great deal to see the status quo remain unchanged since I'm in a small corp, but in the long run such a stagnation would result in collapse of wormhole activity altogether.

+1 for Meissa. You definitely strike me as one of the more rational candidates in CSM7.

P.S. For some reason I will always remember you as the guy who lit the cyno in Ironclad.
T'amber Anomandari Demaleon
#26 - 2012-02-13 02:08:02 UTC
testobjekt wrote:
How can a member of the dreaded CSM5 argue to have any pros?


What CSM 5 are you talking about? It was one of the most effecitve and successful CSM's yet?

www.shipsofeve.com

Aineko Macx
#27 - 2012-02-13 08:09:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Aineko Macx
Why do you think none of the current CSMs has endorsed you for re-election?
Why did neglect actively participating in Assembly Hall almost completely?
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#28 - 2012-02-13 19:06:06 UTC
bump?

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Princess Aricia
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2012-02-13 19:10:48 UTC
+1 from me Smile
NeVeR C0nvICTed
Bei Mir Laeuft
VINDICTIVE
#30 - 2012-02-13 19:16:54 UTC
+1 from me
The Mittani
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#31 - 2012-02-13 19:58:17 UTC
Aineko Macx wrote:
Why do you think none of the current CSMs has endorsed you for re-election?
Why did neglect actively participating in Assembly Hall almost completely?


Well, if I come out and endorse Meissa, some of his constituents might see that as a reason to /not/ vote for him. Meissa was the primary lowsec rep on CSM6 and he did a damn fine job. He did the work, putting many hours into it and posting regularly. He also was happy to oppose me - he doesn't shirk from an argument.

He doesn't like the fact that I'm arrogant and manipulative - who does, besides my own people? - but he's a fine CSM rep and doesn't back down. He was easily one of the top CSM6 reps.

I'd encourage everyone who voted for him last year to again do so.

~hi~

AnnaKalashnikova
Perkone
#32 - 2012-02-13 20:20:43 UTC
My vote is for you Meissa Attention


I think that you have the best candidacy to represent every population in EVE !

ps: thanks for all feedback in French forum community Attention
Deaperblue
White Torpedoes Inc
#33 - 2012-02-13 21:01:29 UTC
You have my voteSmile
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#34 - 2012-02-13 22:05:21 UTC
Aineko Macx wrote:
Why do you think none of the current CSMs has endorsed you for re-election?
Why did neglect actively participating in Assembly Hall almost completely?


The Assembly Hall was the result of the times we were in. The situation for most of the term was dire. There were no development resources available for our requests other than small ones. And almost all of the small requests were already in the backlog, the ones in the assembly hall being large ones or repeats. I read them but giving them support at this time would be telling them "well, I support your proposal, but it's pointless anyway and you won't see it come", which people would tire really fast of hearing. The situation changed at the end and you'll see posts I supported and commented on before the summit.

Politics are usually a tricky affair. Some of us are vying for votes from the same population, so it's difficult to expect praise other than from people who don't overlap with your voter base, particularly since there's fewer seats this time. At the same time credit where credit is due, and I usually post a message of support for people who did a good job representing their constituents, whether I agree with their point of view, their methods, etc. or not. The thing is that if people are not convinced by my candidacy, I'd rather they vote for someone who doesn't suck. So that's what I'll do like every other year. But I'd take it up to the others if you want to know what they think of me.

Since he took the time to post here (my thanks to him), I'll at least comment on Mittani. We spent most of the term agreeing on what constituted the priorities for the CSM as a whole. More resources, less shiny, low cost high return items, boosting industry and populating 0.0 (farms and fields), rebalancing supercapitals, those were the direst needs. Mittani did a fine job communicating, promoting unity in the CSM when it was needed most, and helping foster communication channels with CCP. For this I'm happy to see him run again. He also did a good job defending the needs and wants of his electorate. When it comes to how to change the things we agreed needed change, the fact that I happen to disagree with his priorities and some of his ideas change nothing to my pleasure of working with him, on the contrary since they help paint a good picture for CCP to base decisions on.

In terms of endorsement, I can quote just a few people I've worked with over the years have said:

Quote:

Meissa is extremely analytical, well-versed in game mechanics and cause-and-effect of those mechanics, and able to express himself and his ideas very well.
His game knowledge is excellent and approach to presenting/supporting his opinions both in our internal forums and at Summits is very effective. So while he's one of the "quiet" CSM members, he contributes a lot of value.

-- Mynxee, CSM 5 chairwoman


Quote:

Meissa, despite not being a good or well known poaster is very dedicated, knowledgeable and, something which will be VERY important this time around, pretty impartial and balanced in his views (perhaps frustratingly so at times ). He's also a very nice chap and good fun on the lash for a Belgian.

-- Larkonis Trassler, CSM 3


Quote:

He knows the part of eve that he plays really well and he makes sound arguments even if i dont agree with them, and i think you should vote for him

-- Mazzilliu, CSM 3 and 5


Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#35 - 2012-02-13 22:09:05 UTC
roigon wrote:
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
Gourock wrote:
"last csm (and in your blog) you wanted a wh stabiliser, no mention of this for this csm have you dropped this idea since 99% wh peopel hated the idea or are you still for this change, if it isnt in the small changes you want, why did you drop the idea"


As I said in my blog post, I don't care about a stabilizer, I want to see if a way can be found to prevent people from walling themselves in to an extent such that they are safe from harm.


Can you shortly expand on that. Because while I am no expert, as I see it there is no safe in WH space. Yes given sufficient people you could theoretically keep your WH isolated 24/7 by collapsing every new K162 that appears and not opening your statics.

However, if someone wants you, they can still get you. A sufficiently motivated group can find your WH and bring with it enough firepower to stop you from closing it.

It is just a matter of how much effort each party wants to undertake in either defence or offence. Neither side has a overwhelming advantage. While defence might have the bonus of location and thus hardware, the offensive side has the bonus of time of engagement and as such can dictate when and if the battle happens.


I had written a lengthy post to address your questions, but the forums ate it and now I'm annoyed... I'll get to it again.

The short version is: I don't care about a stabilizer itself, I care about providing a balanced environment. I know full well that the logistics aspect is what makes WH thrive and that needs to be preserved. What I'm doing is looking if a way can be found to address the issues that exist without negatively impacting the current playstyle. It's not high on my priority list, if a way can be found, good, if one can't, then the current situation is better than a botched change.

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#36 - 2012-02-13 22:49:07 UTC
I disagree with Meissa on some stuff (wh stabilizer), but he is a good dude, and does work hard to represent folks who don't get a lot of attention (mostly non-English speaking players). I'd be happy to serve with him again on the CSM.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog

Erik Finnegan
Polytechnique Gallenteenne
#37 - 2012-02-14 12:39:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Erik Finnegan
Having worked with Meissa on CSM3 I can confirm from first hand that he really knows a great deal about most areas of the game. Furthermore, he leaves the Rooks and Kings name tag at the door when it comes to finding solutions to issues in a manner that simply make sense from a game mechanics point of view. This neutral stance applies to discussions with other CSMs as well as discussing with CCP representatives. He can equally well respond to design questions asked by CCP and irks raised by the community.

He is reknown for his participation in and love for WH, Low-sec, and FW. His language skills are not simply fassade or a marketing stunt, but he actively seeks feedback in French, Spanish and German. And lastly, I hold him in high esteem as he was very patient with me being a high-sec dweller and can optimally lay out why high-sec needs to be a risky space after all.
Johnny Marzetti
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#38 - 2012-02-14 19:25:06 UTC
I'm not voting for Meissa but I am bumping his thread because so many of the candidates on page 1 are terrible. Everyone who's enjoyed Crucible should try to send CSM6 members who aren't Darius III back this year.
Sylvmar
Fairlight Corp
Rooks and Kings
#39 - 2012-02-14 22:38:39 UTC
I'm voting Meissa..... again :)
Hydragyre
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#40 - 2012-02-15 10:55:00 UTC
Could you tell us a little bit more of what you think should be done to WH mechanics to improve them without breaking them ?
I believe things like interactive broadcasts and 15ppl watchlists come from you initiative (both these features are awesome btw), do you have some other ones in mind ?

This year I'll be voting for you again, thank you for your hard work