Jita Park Speakers Corner

Removing or limiting access isn't a "sanction"?

Again, cite examples of this actually happening or admit you're wrong. How difficult can this be, Comrade Frying?

Your problem is that you're reading what Hans & two Step said through the filter of your dearly held preconceptions. As I said about 10 posts ago:



CCP have repeatedly affirmed that one of the aspects of the CSM that they hold as the most valuable is their willingness to "call bullshit" (Hilmar's own phrase). CCP Unifex said something similar, although I can't recall the precise quote. If the CSM do so in a constructive, professional way, they'll retain and increase their value in CCP's eyes. If they throw their toys out of the pram, and are obstructionist and childish, they'll lose it. Unfortunately, what people like you and Stanzel want from the CSM isthe very drama spectacle that runs the highest risk of losing CCP's regard.

In addition, I note CSM 4, 5 and 6 repeatedly called bullshit and they were not sanctioned with reduced access so far as I am aware; feel free to accept the challenge of citing an example that actually happened if I missed it. CSMs 5, 6 and 7 all passed on greater access and influence to their successors

For the last time: put up examples or shut up:

I hope that you've learned the difference between raising a possible concern and stating that concern as an established fact.

This is arrant nonsense, even by your standards.

CSM debates about whether or not to go public with our concerns on any particular issue have absolutely nothing to do with fear of getting booted from the CSM or upsetting people at CCP. They about whether or not it is the right move to maximize the chances of getting the desired results -- both in the short term (the issue at hand) and in the longer term (maintaining/increasing our ability to influence future decisions).

Reasonable people can and will disagree about the optimal strategy in any particular real-world case.

In spite Two step's statement that it isn't?

Reading these threads is a wonderful psychological study in observation bias, people see what they want to see, reinforcing whatever conclusions they already have.

Thank you Two step, it is great to see you putting the record straight here.

I think what you did was the right thing, it was a win for the players, for the CSM and for CCP even if they all may not have seen it at the time.

I think that threadnaught was coming in one form or the other, and you managed to channel it into something more constructive than it could have been. Thank you again for doing it.

It is also useful to have your perspective on the perceived risks and how it could have been done better. Future CSMs take note.

I personally see both sides of the argument:

A passive too tight with CCP CSM is a problem, or perhaps more accurately is not a useful thing. It's function is to keep CCP from becoming an echo chamber so that it doesn't go off and do things that are terribad, when it's not gotten adequate outside perspective. If it becomes part of the self-congratulatory echo chamber it is useless. That's what fuels the fears of Poe and Frying.

On the other hand a true activist CSM at some point just becomes the Westboro Baptists. Offensive, noisy, and accomplishing nothing. This is something Ripard needs to learn.

Balance gentlepeople, that is what is needed.

EDIT: I do think some activism can be done that is not necessarily adversarial with CCP, and I think this is often what Ripard means when he's taking about it. It doesn't all have to be threadnaughts and statue shoots. I am looking forward to see what he and CSM8 does with it, presuming he made it on.

You were saying?

I would bet money he was referring more to the contents of said logs than the logs themselves.

A member of CSM 7 and probable member of CSM 8 is caught red handed lying and all you can do is ask if I consider leaked documents a viable communications tool.

He has shown full well that he has lied to the playerbase, he has pointed the finger at fellow CSM members to aid CCP. He has shown us why we as players should demand more of our CSM. They are the voice of the players, not a mouth piece for CCP.

Yes it is nice for the CSM to work with CCP, but not at the cost of their independence.

My mistake I left out the word lying.

Just read the threads in here and the linked document from EvE News 24, it will all become clear to you.

But here is a hint


But I did find a quote for him as he tries to get the CSM8 chairmans position
"Whatever may appear to have been the case before, whatever improper activities may yet be discovered in connection with this whole sordid affair, I want the American people, I want you to know beyond the shadow of a doubt that during my term as President, justice will be pursued fairly, fully, and impartially, no matter who is involved. This office is a sacred trust and I am determined to be worthy of that trust."

The whole "This office is a sacred trust and I am determined to be worthy of that trust." has a nice ring to it don't you think?

Ok I will accept "Trebor probably misspoke" as a possibility that might have occurred.

Now it might have hypothetically appeared to me that Dolan got allegedly upset subsequently making Trebors statement "CSM debates about whether or not to go public with our concerns on any particular issue have absolutely nothing to do with fear of getting booted from the CSM or upsetting people at CCP. ", a complete crock and an outright lie and the statement "Reasonable people can and will disagree about the optimal strategy in any particular real-world case.", would hypothetically have little to do with the CSM/CCP relationship.

But we should probably go with "Trebor probably misspoke"