These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Proposal for CSM Chairman, Secretary.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Frying Doom
#1 - 2013-04-30 06:03:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Who I would like to see as the CSM chairman and secretary and why.

The CSM White Paper describes the positions as follows:
Quote:
The
responsibilities of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman are to handle official communications between the CSM and CCP, and they are expected to be particularly active in interacting with the community. The responsibilities of the Secretary and Vice-Secretary are related to the production of official CSM publications such as the CSM Summit Minutes.


The CSM Chairman has for the most part, excluding CSM7 been the candidate with the highest votes. Now the council must decide.

Given the horrible turn out, of just 12.12% of the voters this year I would like to nominate a candidate for the good of the CSM, rather than just good for someones ego.

I would like to propose the CSM choose Mike Azariah, for the position as Chairman, should he be prepared to accept the position.

He describes himself as
Quote:
I have played Eve for enough time to have tried a bit of almost everything. But if you ask me to nail down the style of play I best represent and identify with it would be the Casual Player. The person who has a job, kids, wife, pets and cannot sit at the machine uninterrupted for five hours straight bashing a POS or waiting for a fleet to form. The person who does not want his entire Eve experience to be spreadsheets or clicking to manage PI.

I have spent more than half a year in wormholes, managing the POS there drove me out, in the end, frustration got that bad. I flew with Soco in the south and did manage to get in on fleets now and again but CTA’s don’t always jibe up with a limited time availability. If you are nodding right now at this then you know what I mean and you have experienced the same sort of problems. You are the one I want to represent. I fly incursions for my isk and then blow it in places like the Bomber Bar or RvB or helping out in contests, donating prizes.

I have been active in the community since 2008.. I currently help host the podcast Podside, I have had a blog as a proud member of the Eve Blog Pack for more than four years. I have written for Eon and the Eve Tribune, often doing commentary on the CSM. My twitter handle is @mikeazariah. If you want to hear the Crossing Zebras interview it is here. Though you will get a lot of what I think from the Podside podcasts as well.

I don’t know it all. I am not a Game Dev nor do I aspire to be one. I am always willing to ask questions when I don’t know the answers and consider the answers carefully. I am a teacher by trade and the skill set that goes with that would be helpful as a CSM member. I take pride in my ability to see things from more than one side and explain my position well.


Now I believe that having him as the Chairman would raise the profile of the CSM with in the eyes of those people who did not bother voting. It will definitely raise the awareness in Hi-sec among the non-voters a lot more than a Null sec member will.

So do something for the good of the CSM, make him chairman, with Mynnna as Vice-Chairman to fill in any holes or problems that might occur due to Mike's RL.

As to Secretary, well can anyone think of a better choice than the blog machine that is Ripard Teg.

Remember, as CSM7 showed so well, the choices you make will effect how the players see you as well as the turn out for the next election. Who you choose for CSM officers will say a lot about whether members are on the CSM for the good of the players and CSM itself, or just on there for for your egos.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#2 - 2013-04-30 06:56:53 UTC
Shame you didn't run for CSM and get elected. Your opinion might technically count in that case!

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Frying Doom
#3 - 2013-04-30 07:09:03 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Shame you didn't run for CSM and get elected. Your opinion might technically count in that case!

CSM member or not it is simple logic.

Good for the CSM or good for the ego of a Null CSM member.

Another Null Chairman will just hurt its image to the players as a whole. It will just look like another Null sec lobby group.

They have the ability to do what is best for the CSM, and after CSM7 it really needs it.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#4 - 2013-04-30 07:29:01 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
Shame you didn't run for CSM and get elected. Your opinion might technically count in that case!

CSM member or not it is simple logic.

Good for the CSM or good for the ego of a Null CSM member.

Another Null Chairman will just hurt its image to the players as a whole. It will just look like another Null sec lobby group.

They have the ability to do what is best for the CSM, and after CSM7 it really needs it.

Your "campaigning" does more to hurt the CSM than any of the 0.0 CSM members can be reasonably expected to, during this term.
Will you take action against that? Maybe a proposal to stop involving yourself in CSM politics?

Oh, wait...
Frying Doom
#5 - 2013-04-30 07:32:34 UTC
Alphea Abbra wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
Shame you didn't run for CSM and get elected. Your opinion might technically count in that case!

CSM member or not it is simple logic.

Good for the CSM or good for the ego of a Null CSM member.

Another Null Chairman will just hurt its image to the players as a whole. It will just look like another Null sec lobby group.

They have the ability to do what is best for the CSM, and after CSM7 it really needs it.

Your "campaigning" does more to hurt the CSM than any of the 0.0 CSM members can be reasonably expected to, during this term.
Will you take action against that? Maybe a proposal to stop involving yourself in CSM politics?

Oh, wait...

Would you care to back that up with a single fact? and I would love to see you prove any thing I have said did more harm than the Null members of CSM 7.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2013-04-30 07:37:27 UTC
The best part of this is I strongly doubt you even asked Mike Azariah if he even wanted to be chair at all, much like you just went ahead and decided to be Issler's unofficial campaign manager last year, so much so that she had to publicly deny having any connection with you whatsoever.

For all of your bluster and acting like you're an agent for the players, you really have a hard time with players making independent decisions that might not involve you. You may want to fix that.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Frying Doom
#7 - 2013-04-30 07:45:08 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
The best part of this is I strongly doubt you even asked Mike Azariah if he even wanted to be chair at all, much like you just went ahead and decided to be Issler's unofficial campaign manager last year, so much so that she had to publicly deny having any connection with you whatsoever.

For all of your bluster and acting like you're an agent for the players, you really have a hard time with players making independent decisions that might not involve you. You may want to fix that.

No I didn't.

I wonder if that is why I put in the words "should he be prepared to accept the position."

Actually the majority of players seem to have decided, that after years of Null sec lobby groups, a lack of transparency and a lack of communication, they have just decided to stop voting.

So the players have made an independent decision, I would like them to change that position, but I doubt that will be changed with more of the same crap.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2013-04-30 07:53:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
Ahh so it's not the Devil STV that tanked the voting turnout anymore, it's the "years of null sec lobby groups"? What changed in the past 9 hours ?

Also

Frying Doom wrote:
No I didn't.

I wonder if that is why I put in the words "should he be prepared to accept the position.".


Are you that afraid of communication that you wouldn't even at least ask the guy if he wanted the position first, let alone clear with him that you starting this thread would be OK? Like imagine if he actually WAS gearing up to try and make a push for the Chair position, and he was going to post his own thread to do the same thing. Do you think he'd be happy that you just stole his thunder to lamely stroke your own ego? Are you that self-important that you think YOUR endorsement is such a difference maker that you just had to go over his head without even so much as talking to him first? Do you think that your endorsement is even a net positive, given several current sitting CSM's openly mock your brand of doom-and-gloom extremist idiocy?

Did you think about this for any more than 20 seconds, and if so, did you consider anyone but yourself as part of it?

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Frying Doom
#9 - 2013-04-30 08:03:13 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Ahh so it's not the Devil STV that tanked the voting turnout anymore, it's the "years of null sec lobby groups"? What changed in the past 9 hours ?

The STV did not help as it does not help in elections world wide, it is even listed as one of its drawbacks. That is one of the reasons the voting dropped.

Did I say it was the only reason the votes dropped?

Strange that I would have said "Yes I think leaving the simpler system, and returning voter interest by making our votes count for who goes to Iceland, then a full year of things from CCP and the CSM as to why the CSM is important, are necessary. As well as a lot of transparency and communication from CSM8. To try to undo this mess." if I thought the STV was the whole problem.

As I said If we end up with another Null chairman it will just be the same crap as before.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#10 - 2013-04-30 08:09:55 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
As I said If we end up with another Null chairman it will just be the same crap as before.


"Same crap" like CSM 6 which led to far and away the largest voting turnout in CSM history? That was the most null dominated CSM of all so far, and it yielded the most success. Even with this year's losses it's still the 2nd best turnout ever.

You can't even rage against things right.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Frying Doom
#11 - 2013-04-30 08:18:28 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
As I said If we end up with another Null chairman it will just be the same crap as before.


"Same crap" like CSM 6 which led to far and away the largest voting turnout in CSM history? That was the most null dominated CSM of all so far, and it yielded the most success. Even with this year's losses it's still the 2nd best turnout ever.

You can't even rage against things right.

Yes it was by far the most communicative and transparent and a step in the right direction, but most of what it did was focused on Null sec. Imagine the success it could have been if it had not just been so focused on Null.

As to second best turn out ever, that is rather narrow, yes it had the second highest number of votes, but the lowest percentage of voters since CSM got 12 month terms.

As I said doing the same crap again, will just lead to the same crap, except now the voters are already not caring in even greater numbers.

But I know you want the chairman to be from your alliance, it is all just an ego thing.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#12 - 2013-04-30 08:25:05 UTC
Actually I just want the Chair to be someone who wants the job, not just the title. You don't even seem too concerned with whether or not your "personal pick" even wants the title, let alone the job. All you give a **** about is where in space the Chair lives, which is ironically enough exactly the type of self-serving nonsense you accuse CSM fill-in-the-blank of being.

Also CSM 6's focus wasn't so much on null as it was "making sure CCP doesn't die as a company in front of us". Summer of Rage and all that. I would ask why you don't remember that, but given you keep referring to "years of null sec lobby groups" when CSM 5 had virtually no null presence at all (and CSM 7 was almost perfectly diverse), I don't think you pay too much attention to anything that might spoil your catchphrase-du-jour.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Frying Doom
#13 - 2013-04-30 08:49:06 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Actually I just want the Chair to be someone who wants the job, not just the title. You don't even seem too concerned with whether or not your "personal pick" even wants the title, let alone the job. All you give a **** about is where in space the Chair lives, which is ironically enough exactly the type of self-serving nonsense you accuse CSM fill-in-the-blank of being.

Which do you think will get more people to vote next year, a Hi-sec candidate who has a record of communication with the playerbase. Or another Null sec candidate, yes there are a lot of Null candates who would do a good job, but I think Mike would do a better one.

Snow Axe wrote:
Also CSM 6's focus wasn't so much on null as it was "making sure CCP doesn't die as a company in front of us". Summer of Rage and all that. I would ask why you don't remember that, but given you keep referring to "years of null sec lobby groups" when CSM 5 had virtually no null presence at all (and CSM 7 was almost perfectly diverse), I don't think you pay too much attention to anything that might spoil your catchphrase-du-jour.

http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/CSM_6_Activities_Summary

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#14 - 2013-04-30 08:54:39 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Which do you think will get more people to vote next year, a Hi-sec candidate who has a record of communication with the playerbase. Or another Null sec candidate, yes there are a lot of Null candates who would do a good job, but I think Mike would do a better one.y


And your opinion is based on literally nothing other than "NULLSEC IS YUCKY". This is why nobody listens to you, by the way.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Frying Doom
#15 - 2013-04-30 09:17:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Snow Axe wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Which do you think will get more people to vote next year, a Hi-sec candidate who has a record of communication with the playerbase. Or another Null sec candidate, yes there are a lot of Null candates who would do a good job, but I think Mike would do a better one.y


And your opinion is based on literally nothing other than "NULLSEC IS YUCKY". This is why nobody listens to you, by the way.

I am glad, mainly because you guys can drop the whole, you are so damaging crap as well as the fact that NULLSEC IS YUCKY.Lol Just ask anyone who lives there.

My opinion is based on what I think the other 87.88% of the eligible voters would like and that is not


  • Another CSM headed by a Null sec member.
  • An STV Voting system
  • A council where CCP chooses 5 of the people that go to Iceland.
  • A non-communicative CSM
  • A CSM that is as transparent as a brick.
  • Another CSM that is just a mouth piece for CCP


Players want the why, they should vote. The how while important is no way near as important as the why.

Oh and of course CCP not waiting till the last minute to promote the CSM would help too.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#16 - 2013-04-30 10:01:48 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
My opinion is based on what I think the other 87.88% of the eligible voters would like and that is not

So, your opinion is based on taking the support from ~88% of EVE accounts as granted?
You know, that is a quite impressive amount of hubris and ego you're sporting there...

Quote:

  • Another CSM headed by a Null sec member.
  • An STV Voting system
  • A council where CCP chooses 5 of the people that go to Iceland.
  • A non-communicative CSM
  • A CSM that is as transparent as a brick.
  • Another CSM that is just a mouth piece for CCP

So, the first is based solely on your inability to realise how 0.0 is not a hivemind.
The second is a grasp for straws.
The third is a lie.
The three last are so loaded with your tinfoil I'm surprised it didn't DDoS the forums.
Quote:
Players want the why, they should vote. The how while important is no way near as important as the why.

Oh and of course CCP not waiting till the last minute to promote the CSM would help too.

I also found some of CCPs comments rather funny. " CCP Solomon – Technical Producer

Since its inception, the CSM has gone through significant change both in the quality of its interactions with CCP and its value as perceived by the player base."

As apparently their "quality of its interactions with CCP" were going up while "its value as perceived by the player base.", was hitting the floor.Lol

Do you have a context for that? As I read the quote itself, he's speaking about the improvements in both areas.
But of course, I'm a (proto-)goon, so my opinion doesn't count, right?
Frying Doom
#17 - 2013-04-30 10:15:39 UTC
Alphea Abbra wrote:

But of course, I'm a (proto-)goon, so my opinion doesn't count, right?

Actually I just think your a raving nutter.

"So, the first is based solely on your inability to realise how 0.0 is not a hivemind.
The second is a grasp for straws.
The third is a lie.
The three last are so loaded with your tinfoil I'm surprised it didn't DDoS the forums."

If you actually understood the word think, it might be helpful.

1) My beliefs are not what I was talking about but what I perceive to be the views of the other 87.88%
2) Try reading the players comments on the STV voting system not just the sound of your own voice.
3) Point 3, I believe the answer should be "Are you on crack?"
and it is good to see you believe that a communicative, transparent CSM, that is a voice of the players is just for tinfoil wearers.

And frankly after your tinfoil hat comment, no your opinion doesn't count.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#18 - 2013-04-30 13:54:52 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
If you actually understood the word think, it might be helpful.
Whereas you need to actually think?

Quote:
1) My beliefs are not what I was talking about but what I perceive to be the views of the other 87.88%
Exactly, you try to be spokesperson for ~88% who didn't vote, and claim that your issues are their issues.
Doesn't that seem, just slightly, like the self-absorbed stereotype you paint the goons as?
Quote:
2) Try reading the players comments on the STV voting system not just the sound of your own voice.
They have been both positive and negative for the system itself, while the voting website was a hassle (And apparently got some tweaking).
As for "my voice" or your "I'm the players" ... I didn't state an opinion predicated upon support from ~88% of the players.
Quote:
3) Point 3, I believe the answer should be "Are you on crack?"
and it is good to see you believe that a communicative, transparent CSM, that is a voice of the players is just for tinfoil wearers.
You're going quite far to misrepresent me, but I am not surprised after seeing what you have said about goons, Issler and a lot of other people/groups.

Quote:
And frankly after your tinfoil hat comment, no your opinion doesn't count.

I take that as a good sign.
If you valued my opinion and supported it, I might have to reevaluate my stance on the issue in question.

Cool
Frying Doom
#19 - 2013-04-30 14:04:13 UTC
Funny I don't remember saying I have the support of the other 88% of EvE.

But frankly neither does the CSM, and just doing the same things again and again and expecting a different result, well that is just nuts.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#20 - 2013-04-30 14:10:11 UTC
My last 3 points, were that the players do not want
Frying Doom wrote:
A non-communicative CSM
A CSM that is as transparent as a brick.
Another CSM that is just a mouth piece for CCP

Your response
Alphea Abbra wrote:
The three last are so loaded with your tinfoil I'm surprised it didn't DDoS the forums.

and you claim
Alphea Abbra wrote:
You're going quite far to misrepresent me, but I am not surprised after seeing what you have said about goons, Issler and a lot of other people/groups.

And I am misrepresenting you by saying "you believe that a communicative, transparent CSM, that is a voice of the players is just for tinfoil wearers. "

I think I will once again refer you to point 3.Lol

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
123Next pageLast page