These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Mike Azariah for CSM8 - Representing YOU

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2013-03-19 02:09:33 UTC
Paxton Brimstone wrote:
If by chance you do get elected I hope you show all of us wrong and do good work.


I hope I do get the chance to prove you wrong. And I appreciate the fact that you think even my 'jabber' is well thought out.

Isn't that partially what you want from a CSM member though? Someone who can think and isn't locked into his own personal agenda? Someone willing to hear all sides of an argument and actually CONSIDER the prospect that somebody else might know more than you do?

I think.

I encourage that qualitiy in others.

I'm not your first choice, fine. But then, there are 14 spots on the ballot in the main election.

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Dee Carson
Licence To Kill
Mercenary Coalition
#42 - 2013-03-22 20:15:21 UTC
I've known Mike for several years. I'll be voting for him because:

- I know him to be a person of honesty and integrity.
- He is respectful of the view points of others, even when he doesn't agree with them.
- He searches for common ground to allow progress to be made, even if no one gets 100% of what they want.

I don't agree with him all the time on specifics, but we have always been on the same page with regard to process.

Regards,
DC
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
#43 - 2013-03-24 14:32:31 UTC
Mike, what is your stance on NPC corps ?
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2013-03-24 15:37:30 UTC
My stand on NPC corps. In the beginning they are a necessity. Players starting out need a safe haven while they learn what the game is iike. But later, their benefits start to be come a bit more . . .extreme.

I'd love to see the numbers to show whether the raising of taxes of the NPC corps actually had the intended effect of moving people to player corps. Was the change in tax rate enough?

Immunity to wardecs needs to come at a price , , , but have we correctly set that price. Face it, it is not just the 'carebears' who live under that shield. Lots of null players have hauler alts motoring along under the same umbrella.

People keep talking about risk-reward comparisons but I think we also need to talk safety-cost. Yes, you can be safe but it shoudl bear a price tag. I think the newbie corps should have next to NO taxes but only allow people who still qualify for Rookie Chat. Until I see the numbers of the last tax hike I cannot say whether jacking the rates higher would be a good idea. Or whether it would be more beneficial to tax other activities.

This is one of the key things that CSM members have a chance to do, make more informed decisions.

I'd like chance to get that information to make those decisions properly based on the history of the issue, not on a knee-jerk reaction to save the carebears or kick them out into the cold harsh universe.

Best decisions come when you understand the question and have thought about all the consequences.

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
None ofthe Above
#45 - 2013-03-24 18:34:16 UTC
Quick note to state my formal endorsement of Mike for CSM8. Part of my CSM dream team!

I appreciate your honest approach (just hope it doesn't hobble you too badly).

Your well thought out alternative viewpoint would be valuable on the CSM.

Go get 'em, Mike!

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
#46 - 2013-03-24 20:00:13 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
My stand on NPC corps. In the beginning they are a necessity. Players starting out need a safe haven while they learn what the game is iike. But later, their benefits start to be come a bit more . . .extreme.

I'd love to see the numbers to show whether the raising of taxes of the NPC corps actually had the intended effect of moving people to player corps. Was the change in tax rate enough?

Immunity to wardecs needs to come at a price , , , but have we correctly set that price. Face it, it is not just the 'carebears' who live under that shield. Lots of null players have hauler alts motoring along under the same umbrella.

People keep talking about risk-reward comparisons but I think we also need to talk safety-cost. Yes, you can be safe but it shoudl bear a price tag. I think the newbie corps should have next to NO taxes but only allow people who still qualify for Rookie Chat. Until I see the numbers of the last tax hike I cannot say whether jacking the rates higher would be a good idea. Or whether it would be more beneficial to tax other activities.

This is one of the key things that CSM members have a chance to do, make more informed decisions.

I'd like chance to get that information to make those decisions properly based on the history of the issue, not on a knee-jerk reaction to save the carebears or kick them out into the cold harsh universe.

Best decisions come when you understand the question and have thought about all the consequences.

m



Thanks for you answer Mike.

Not far from my thoughts, except I don't think there should be any immunity to wardecs, or to put it differently there is no price high enough to be completely immune from them when you are not a rookie. (probably not a wardec on a corp as a whole, but may be a wardec per person)

It would be interesting to see you on the CSM Mike.

And Good luck in the CSM race.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#47 - 2013-03-24 21:14:31 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
My stand on NPC corps. In the beginning they are a necessity. Players starting out need a safe haven while they learn what the game is iike. But later, their benefits start to be come a bit more . . .extreme.

I'd love to see the numbers to show whether the raising of taxes of the NPC corps actually had the intended effect of moving people to player corps. Was the change in tax rate enough?

Immunity to wardecs needs to come at a price , , , but have we correctly set that price. Face it, it is not just the 'carebears' who live under that shield. Lots of null players have hauler alts motoring along under the same umbrella.

People keep talking about risk-reward comparisons but I think we also need to talk safety-cost. Yes, you can be safe but it shoudl bear a price tag. I think the newbie corps should have next to NO taxes but only allow people who still qualify for Rookie Chat. Until I see the numbers of the last tax hike I cannot say whether jacking the rates higher would be a good idea. Or whether it would be more beneficial to tax other activities.

This is one of the key things that CSM members have a chance to do, make more informed decisions.

I'd like chance to get that information to make those decisions properly based on the history of the issue, not on a knee-jerk reaction to save the carebears or kick them out into the cold harsh universe.

Best decisions come when you understand the question and have thought about all the consequences.

m



Most people who talk about hisec straight have no clue as they're not hiseccers. Veteran hiseccers are rare to come by as hisec burns out players before they really become veterans. They move elsewhere or leave the game as veteran hiseccers are not supposed to exist despite hisec is the majority of the game.

This leads to some common misconceptions, and I see the ugly nose of one of them in your post: namely, the assumption that "making life uncomfortable for group X will drive them into insert-your-pet-cooler-group". No. Make NPC corps unbearable and people will either start one-man corps or leave the game. Make one-man corps unbearable and people will rather leave the game than move to larger player corps.

A player determined to be in the invisible majority (and so to play mostly solo in hisec and on a casual schedule) will either do that or play another game. In the long run he will find himself in the short end of CCP's development efforts and will leave nonetheless, thus -I'll repeat- veteran hiseccers become a rare sight.

Currently hisec pushes players into a dilemma: do else or leave. And they leave.
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2013-03-24 21:39:47 UTC
Quote:
This leads to some common misconceptions, and I see the ugly nose of one of them in your post: namely, the assumption that "making life uncomfortable for group X will drive them into insert-your-pet-cooler-group". No. Make NPC corps unbearable and people will either start one-man corps or leave the game. Make one-man corps unbearable and people will rather leave the game than move to larger player corps.


And if you look at some of my previous stuff you will see that I remain cognizant of that issue. Which is why I want to see the numbers FIRST before I start waving my arms and saying 'change this, double that"

Did the tax hike cause a drop in subs the last time? Did it have the intended effect?

I am totally aware of and cautious of negative aspects of large scale changes. I would like to see this game continue to grow, not stagnate and definitely not shrink.

I was asked what I thought of npc corps and I stated that I think the balance could and should be watched. I also think that tax structure needs work, this would hit right across ALL securities. Ratters in a corp get taxed. Are there isk making activities in corp systems that don't get taxed? Should they?

I said at the outset, I am not a junior game dev. That is not what you are electing. CSM does not MAKE the policy. CCP does.

I am running as a player trying to better the game, for everybody. Not for one security or one playstyle. Everybody.

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
#49 - 2013-03-24 22:02:31 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:


Most people who talk about hisec straight have no clue as they're not hiseccers. Veteran hiseccers are rare to come by as hisec burns out players before they really become veterans. They move elsewhere or leave the game as veteran hiseccers are not supposed to exist despite hisec is the majority of the game.

This leads to some common misconceptions, and I see the ugly nose of one of them in your post: namely, the assumption that "making life uncomfortable for group X will drive them into insert-your-pet-cooler-group". No. Make NPC corps unbearable and people will either start one-man corps or leave the game. Make one-man corps unbearable and people will rather leave the game than move to larger player corps.

A player determined to be in the invisible majority (and so to play mostly solo in hisec and on a casual schedule) will either do that or play another game. In the long run he will find himself in the short end of CCP's development efforts and will leave nonetheless, thus -I'll repeat- veteran hiseccers become a rare sight.

Currently hisec pushes players into a dilemma: do else or leave. And they leave.



I think eve players are more determined and resourceful then you give them credit for.
Btw who said anything about making player corps unbearable?
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#50 - 2013-03-24 22:43:52 UTC
Ashlar Vellum wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:


Most people who talk about hisec straight have no clue as they're not hiseccers. Veteran hiseccers are rare to come by as hisec burns out players before they really become veterans. They move elsewhere or leave the game as veteran hiseccers are not supposed to exist despite hisec is the majority of the game.

This leads to some common misconceptions, and I see the ugly nose of one of them in your post: namely, the assumption that "making life uncomfortable for group X will drive them into insert-your-pet-cooler-group". No. Make NPC corps unbearable and people will either start one-man corps or leave the game. Make one-man corps unbearable and people will rather leave the game than move to larger player corps.

A player determined to be in the invisible majority (and so to play mostly solo in hisec and on a casual schedule) will either do that or play another game. In the long run he will find himself in the short end of CCP's development efforts and will leave nonetheless, thus -I'll repeat- veteran hiseccers become a rare sight.

Currently hisec pushes players into a dilemma: do else or leave. And they leave.



I think eve players are more determined and resourceful then you give them credit for.
Btw who said anything about making player corps unbearable?


It is funny how you deem a bad thing to state that players choose the ingame styles that better suit to having RL responsabilities incompatible with massive multiplaying, in a game where the average player age is 35. To a good chunk of the playerbase, EVE is competing with real life, and it's losing.

You can't blame EVE players to stay where the game allows them... until it drives them away.
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2013-03-26 16:01:39 UTC
Now is the time, folks. The endorsement page is up and I need 200 endorsements to make it into the election.

Please, take a moment and go HERE and give me your endorsement

When I reach 200 I won't fool around with any secret gamesmanship. I'll let you know I have enough.

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Cherry Comfort
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#52 - 2013-03-26 18:59:07 UTC
I like what I hear - you seem like someone who genuinely listens to others' opinions and isn't only concerned about one aspect of the game.

You have my endorsement vote, from multiple accounts.
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#53 - 2013-03-26 19:26:39 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:


When I reach 200 I won't fool around with any secret gamesmanship. I'll let you know I have enough.

m

How will you know you have 200?
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2013-03-26 22:39:56 UTC
According to the dev blog relevant to the elections

Quote:
Candidates will be informed by email when they pass the 200 vote threshold.


I get the mail, I make the post.

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Anslo
Scope Works
#55 - 2013-03-26 23:33:55 UTC
+1 and endorsed.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Modron Midumulf
Nordom Holdings
#56 - 2013-03-26 23:52:19 UTC
Endorsed, Good luck!
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#57 - 2013-03-27 00:53:07 UTC  |  Edited by: DarthNefarius
Mike Azariah wrote:
According to the dev blog relevant to the elections

Quote:
Candidates will be informed by email when they pass the 200 vote threshold.


I get the mail, I make the post.

m


lol what happens if you pass the 200 thresh hold then people change thier endorsement to another person bringing you under? Will CCP then spam your Evemail box if you go up & down with a fickle electorate? Lol
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2013-03-27 05:48:37 UTC
I really want to know about the question Darth asked.

Can someone bait and switch enough that you are endorsed and then not?

Could a large organized group troll endorsements?

Excellent question, I'll see if I can find an answer

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Gabriel's Henchman
BlackWatch Industrial Group
Memento Moriendo
#59 - 2013-03-27 07:59:59 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Could a large organized group troll endorsements?

Excellent question, I'll see if I can find an answer

m




Please Mike.... don't tempt them!

Also... +2 votes/endorsements.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#60 - 2013-03-27 14:08:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Indahmawar Fazmarai
Mike Azariah wrote:
I really want to know about the question Darth asked.

Can someone bait and switch enough that you are endorsed and then not?

Could a large organized group troll endorsements?

Excellent question, I'll see if I can find an answer

m



Bear in mind that once every candidate with more than 200 endorsements gets a place in the ballot, and if there are less than 28 candidates, candidates with less endorsements will be added to the ballot until filling it.

So all you need is to be the 28th most endorsed even if you don't make to 200 endorsements... Bear