Jita Park Speakers Corner

the views of npc altposters are completely irrelevant except for providing amusement for those of us who post with our mains

hope this helps

I'm actually more concerned with hearing views of candidates who take player concerns seriously Mittens but thanks for offering your opinion (however unoriginal).

However just to help clarify your actual views about the AH:

All pilots will be able to effect my platform via a CSM voting/ issue tool created for this very purpose.
The results of which will define my stance on particular topics.

Regards,
T'amber

While I do keep an eye on the Assembly Hall and Jita Park, the best method is the most direct - eve mail. Over the course of CSM 6 I had several issues brought to my attention via direct contact. This can be something as simple as, "Hey, check out this forum thread." to entire packets of information / proposals. I try to reply to every CSM-related evemail I get and, on some issues, even take the discussion to a Skype chat.

Don't be shy about contacting a member of the CSM, especially if you voted for them.

This is what I tried many months ago....low and behold, it worked! They contacted me back. I strongly encourage players who want to be heard simply try evemailing your CSM representatives. If CSM6 hadn't communicated back with me, I would still be pretty jaded right now about the effectiveness of the CSM and would never have bothered running for office.

I think the frustrating element for many players is that the new system for getting things done on the CSM (the revolving door CSM / Dev Skype Channel) is a double-edged sword. It allows for the free exchange of ideas and more daily progress on the issues, and increased importance for the non-travelling council members. The drawback, however, is that there isn't a really good way to digest those NDA-protected discussions on a regular basis except for through more consistent blogging.

In general I think there needs to be less eye-rolling and hesitation about putting on the hip-waders and delving into the forums, even if all that can be said in some situations is "we've talked with CCP ________ about ________, we can't share details but what we've seen is exciting". Players deserve to know what their representatives are up to, and who is engaged in the process.

As for the Assembly Hall itself, the critical thing here is to update all the instructions regarding the Assembly Hall process. Currently there are stickied guides that still reference outdated procedures about putting up proposals and getting them "passed" by the council. This process of officially backlogging fixes no longer exists, but the fact that it is still stickied and described is HORRIBLY confusing for players. The thread and instructions on how to participate effectively need to be updated with respect to current procedures, so players don't have false expectations about how to get heard.

Of course a vast majority of some of those responces could just be dismissing NPC posters or anyone who isn't a fanboi.

Don't see what your point qualifies really, other than the CSM communicates in their forum. Especially when I guess we should look at these things in a qualatative manner aswell as whatever "popularity" metrics might be granted them.

Where are the stats associated with outcomes from the official topics in the AH forum? Whats the official message of each of these points as represented to CCP. If we are led to believe from certain candidates opinions they simply sit there unanswered. Are we therefore to conclude that CSM simply represents their own forwarded points to CCP.

If so what is CCP's stance as to this obvious disregard to what the CSM duties should be regarding this, as represented in their white paper. Why has this be left as ignored for so long, potentially insulting individuals who have invested time and effort into representing issues in the AH? Have CCP evolved their stance that the CSM is all down to the democratic process with candidates and no longer affords an official process for players to interact in context with the CSM?

If so this places more importance of course in ensuring you vote for a candidate who can represent your views or enforcing that player interest in the CSM if the process is "lobbying". Can concede this as the current situation if its fact.

Does this belittle the process of player involvement to be concerned with the CSM as a result. Certainly if voting figures to accounts are to be an indicator of this, we would likley see that it isnt an indicator of player representation. So you could potentially argue that the Features and Ideas forum should be the more important medium for persuading CCP on development. Interesting that there have been voiced opinions that players perceive this to be the case of course.

Of course if it is viewed that voting is the only way to effect CCP development in an offical capacity it could encourage the view to enforce obligatory voting. As then at the least each player has been afforded the official opportunity of voicing their position.

Interestingly however, why are you Andski responding to a post from an NPC alt, I thought we held no relevance to you?

i clearly spent /hours/ writing up a 3 line response dismissing your misguided and irrelevant opinion

son if I engaged in a serious heated exchange with you you'd biomass your forum alt in shame

come with your main and i'll happily tear you to shreds

I too, would like to have an intelligent debate on a small detail of a relatively obscure internet spaceship mmo.


Also, it's 'you're mad".
You're welcome.

I take it you're not a native English speaker? I can't tell if you're just 15 or from another continent, and I just thought this was a relevant question to your campaign ad.



greetz
Corebloodbrothers, CSM7 candidate