Jita Park Speakers Corner

They did get the opinions of the playerbase when they were voted in. The people who voted for them agreed with what they stood for and they will represent them as much as possible.

As far as representing new players, this year we have Ali who should do a fantastic job of that.

The document that you read was not aimed at you, but rather at CCP and released to the playerbase. The reason for the swing toward 0.0 is that they are currently in the need of the most iteration.

Thus the CSM is to act as the voice of the player base and determine if any alterations to be made to the game will be for “greatest good for the greater player base”.

They are also there to relay our feelings towards game design to CCP and keep the player base as informed as possible.

While the CSM is now made up from 10 Null sec members as well as 2 Wormhole candidates and given that Null is in an awful state, it is their job to evaluate any change in relation to the player base as a whole and not just those who voted for them. This I will admit must be one of the hardest parts of their job as the people who voted for them especially in CSM8 are the minorities and not the majority of the game, that has little or nothing to do with the forums, emails sent to them or surveys that they could complete.

As to CSM7 yes they did fail to communicate effectively and regularly with the player base, a fact repeated by almost every candidate for the CSM8 elections. I will admit it is my hope that CSM8 do better than CSM7 or even CSM6 in communicating with the player base, using these very forums as the primary point of contact. For example, if they go on a pod-cast, post a link in Jita Park, same if they post on reddit, The Mittani.com and any where else so that it is possible for people to easily find the information or even better have a specific website address where people can go to for example csm8.eveonline.com

This one won't be.

Interesting response. If this was for me, you seem to have jumped to a lot of conclusion... based on nothing I posted.

You mean I have to put my iron nails and lumber away for the moment.

Well, keep them handy just in case.

I think "distinguish" might be a better term.

Incidentally, The Mittani was very specific and open about his intentiion to only represent the people who voted for him. How do you feel about that?

And why, pray tell, would you care to "distinguish" between the two if not to treat them differently?

Nothing wrong at all with being insular if that's the way you want to go. Talking about being open and then acting insular is another thing entirely, though.

Use 'em for yourself. Might be difficult, but you're a driven, motivated individual. I'm sure you'll manage.



Anyway, with regards to that strategy document the CSM came up with - which yes, given the circumstances of its creation as Aleks described almost can't help but be colored by the largely bittervet and nullsec focused nature of CSM7 - what's even more important than what the CSM said in it is how CCP reacted to it (or started talking in its wake which may or may not have been prompted by it). CCP Seagull talks about classifying players in a very different way than the document, for example, not as high/low/nullsec/wspace players, but "enablers" and "instigators" and such. And on top of that, there's their own development strategy that tries to build expansions to give things for all those types of players, rather than the old style of things that did tend to focus more on high/low/null or what have you.

It's pretty important, the focus on classifying players especially, because while the needs of the classifications CCP started using may differ in the various areas of space (often, I'd say, as a matter of scale), the base needs are pretty similar.


In any case, to more broadly address your original question, our role is to be player representatives. You are absolutely right, though, that no person is an island, and I'm well aware that my perspective on what's wrong (or right) with the game may well not match your perspective. In this specific instance, I haven't been as young as you are in a godawful long time, although Ali Aras is very close. Her insight will be valuable. If I don't really know about something, though, I'm not mind readers, so if you're happy to talk, I'm happy to listen, and I think quite a few others on CSM8 are as well. Evemail is my preferred medium.

Just, you know, keep it reasonable, and civil, and rational and such. I may not always agree with something but I'm more willing to listen if it's presented well. If I want insane ravings, there are plenty of places I can get it already.