These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The Office of the Chairman: A ~chill place~ for constituent issues

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#521 - 2012-02-03 01:25:33 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
Vote for me. More votes = more mandate = more power.

vOv

ofc, every candidate will tell you to vote for them, so make up your own mind.

Seconding this post. Follow this man's advice, you'll be thankful you did!

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#522 - 2012-02-03 02:54:28 UTC
The Mittani wrote:

.....When CSM6 was elected, a huge chunk of the playerbase thought the CSM was a waste of time and powerless. After my tenure as Chair, most of the screeching has changed tone to 'CSM has too much power', ....



I don't recall anyone saying that recently. I think you complained that CCP was listening to csm 5. But after that there was very few who thought ccp was listening to csm too much. In fact, your saying that of csm 5 may have been the only time anyone ever complained CSM had too much power.

I think the concerns are still that CSM is a pr stunt for ccp. The "emergency summit" where you attempted damage control for ccp and your "defense of incarna" definitely increased that perception. But alas it wasn't enough and people kept unsubbing. So ccp had to actually work on their product and hence we get crucible.

Yes CSM 6 did seem to eventually come around and encourage ccp to work on EVE. CSM6 was ridiculously late in the game but it did eventually happen. So I’m glad you all finally came around.

The other screeching has to do with CSM 6 now just giving their own personal opinions behind the closed door of the nda. Most of these personal opinions never got the support of players via assembly hall. Did *anything* CSM 6 said in the minutes get an assembly hall vote?

So when we get the minutes and read you guys recommending things no one even heard of, let alone supported I think they are like "yeah whatever we have nothing to do with any of this crap."


Now if you mean that csm has *in-game* power because of the increased nda information you are privy to, then yeah a bit of concern was expressed. I myself raised that issue, but really no one seemed to care. Oh well.


If you guys were so powerfull the forums wouldn't eat so many posts.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
The Mittani
State War Academy
Caldari State
#523 - 2012-02-03 03:35:57 UTC
You're one of the screechers, of course; you screeched back when I ran for CSM6, and you're still screeching.

But hey, at least you're not in ~The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION~ anymore (tildes mine, actual corp name otherwise, no troll) so maybe someone could accidentally take your posts seriously.

~hi~
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#524 - 2012-02-03 05:52:49 UTC
Typherian wrote:
Hell I'm a former BOB-*** and I'm voting for mittani. Only things I think really need fixing have already been stated a billion times over. Just gotta be sure to keep CCP going the way they are going instead of meandering back onto their road to oblivion via barbies and the like and all will be swell. Don't care bout what the goons do in nullsec what the CSM has been doing for eve is whats important.

EDIT: This may have already been asked but reading this whole thread would make my eyes hurt. I'm not really sure blasters need any more buffing. They are pretty nasty with all the Null changes. I do on the other hand think railguns still suck. Do we know if they are getting specific buffs or will it continue as changes to hybrids overall?


I fly gallente a whole lot and completely agree. I honestly considered blasters very well balanced before the null change.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#525 - 2012-02-03 06:12:50 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
You're one of the screechers, of course; you screeched back when I ran for CSM6, and you're still screeching.

But hey, at least you're not in ~The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION~ anymore (tildes mine, actual corp name otherwise, no troll) so maybe someone could accidentally take your posts seriously.


Yeah whatever. What I said is true. You know it. So you didn't/can't take issue with any particular point I made.

I'm certainly not screeching that csm6 has too much power over ccp. lol.

You were the one screeching to your alliance that ccp is listening to csm 5. You can try to deny it but the internet remembers this sort of thing.

I'm also not entirely unhappy with you guys/csm6 so no reason to get upset.

And what is the problem with my old corp? Your lazier than I am retiring before 30 and all. I can't believe someone from goose swarm is saying they can't take my posts seriously because of my corp. ffs!

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#526 - 2012-02-03 06:47:50 UTC
Cearain wrote:

And what is the problem with my old corp? Your lazier than I am retiring before 30 and all. I can't believe someone from goose swarm is saying they can't take my posts seriously because of my corp. ffs!


You know you're probably giving him a woodie right now, Cearain. Roll He loves hearing this stuff.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Steel Heid
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#527 - 2012-02-03 20:43:01 UTC
Regarding the issue of supercap proliferation, what are your views regarding the various proposals of introducing a new class of heavy bombers, using citadel torps and/or heavy 'doomsday' bombs, instead of direct nerfing or changing mechanics? Ideas such as this mainly. Advantages would be:

- it adds new content to the game, new stuff to build and blob up
- it's a more natural way from a RP/mechanic/whatever point of view to say "in response to this [...] , a new weapon was developed", rather than "your super works like this, and now it doesn't"
- which means supercap owners won't be able to complain about their stuff getting nerfed. Hey, your super is just as powerfull as it used to be. You can still drop 30 titans at will...
Minmatar Citizen 769594585726
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#528 - 2012-02-05 10:10:44 UTC
As a nullsec resident deeply involved in the EVE endgame, I strongly believe CCP management is the greatest danger to my gameplay. Therefore I will be voting all three of my accounts for The Mittani, King of Space. He is the only candidate with a proven track record of thwarting CCP's terrible plans. I hope my support will give him an even larger cudgel to beat CCP in CSM7.

-Adolf Hilmar, concerned voter
Che Biko
Alexylva Paradox
#529 - 2012-02-05 18:03:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Che Biko
The Mittani wrote:
Amusingly, the release of the minutes didn't see much action itt, so I assume you all loved them!

Well, some people post on the comments thread of the devblog, and others on the related thread on Jita Park instead of ITT.
The Mittani wrote:
I got elected to chair with only 1750 GSF votes in CSM6; the rest of my 5365 votes came from non-GSF sources,

How do you know this?

Coordination Channel for Consolidated Space Rescue Cooperation

Open Letter to the Aidonis Foundation Directorate
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#530 - 2012-02-05 21:24:00 UTC
Che Biko wrote:

The Mittani wrote:
I got elected to chair with only 1750 GSF votes in CSM6; the rest of my 5365 votes came from non-GSF sources,

How do you know this?


Because he know's what he's doing. When you have an alliance full of *enough* sheep (not saying every Goon is incapable of thinking for themselves), its pretty easy to command a specific number of them to vote one way, and the others to vote the rest.

Mittens has the capability to cause GSF to either vote completely for himself, or to divide their votes between other candidates.

The 1750 votes was probably by design.

As for guaranteeing the other 3500 votes, that was a coordinated work with the Clusterfuck Coalition, containing leaders of other alliances with equally high compliance rates when giving out vote orders.

To win an election in EvE, you can't just "throw your hat" into the ring and pray for good results. The winning candidates, year after year, are those that have taken the time to guarantee their own voter base, and usually know how many votes they will get, and from where, long before the talking heads make their predictions or the first vote is ever cast.

That's the perennial challenge for the non-0.0 candidates.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#531 - 2012-02-05 21:26:18 UTC
Adolf Hilmar wrote:
As a nullsec resident deeply involved in the EVE endgame, I strongly believe CCP management is the greatest danger to my gameplay. Therefore I will be voting all three of my accounts for The Mittani, King of Space. He is the only candidate with a proven track record of thwarting CCP's terrible plans. I hope my support will give him an even larger cudgel to beat CCP in CSM7.

-Adolf Hilmar, concerned voter

This is beautiful.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#532 - 2012-02-05 21:38:19 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Che Biko wrote:

The Mittani wrote:
I got elected to chair with only 1750 GSF votes in CSM6; the rest of my 5365 votes came from non-GSF sources,

How do you know this?


Because he know's what he's doing. When you have an alliance full of *enough* sheep ...


Occam's razor.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
The Mittani
State War Academy
Caldari State
#533 - 2012-02-05 22:26:02 UTC
Che Biko wrote:
The Mittani wrote:
Amusingly, the release of the minutes didn't see much action itt, so I assume you all loved them!

Well, some people post on the comments thread of the devblog, and others on the related thread on Jita Park instead of ITT.
The Mittani wrote:
I got elected to chair with only 1750 GSF votes in CSM6; the rest of my 5365 votes came from non-GSF sources,

How do you know this?


Because we had a system on our forums which would tell GSF members to either vote for myself or Vile Rat based on whether their forum ids were even or odd numbers, and then an exit poll page which would track how many accounts they used to vote for their designated candidate. This let us track to ensure we had a roughly even split, so that people didn't just mash vote for me and leave Vile Rat hanging. I was told to vote for Vile Rat, so I did!

Of course, self-reporting is always open to misrepresentation, blah blah. But about ~1750 for each myself and VR from GSF.

~hi~
Mintrolio
Doomheim
#534 - 2012-02-06 00:40:48 UTC
CONFRIMIGN THAT IS LOT OF VOTE.

ALSO I AM HOPE I GETTIGN JUST HALF THESE VOTE MAYBE EVEN ONE QUARTR.

ALSO I FINDIGN IT DIFFICUTL TO BELEAF THET SUCH A ~POPLUAR~ SPACEMAN MUST TELLIGN PEEPOL TO VOTIGN FUR HIM - SURLY YOU TROLL US AGAIN.

ALSO YOU SUCH A KIDDER!

KEEP UP THE GOOD POASTIGN!

MINTROLIO FUR CSM7
Che Biko
Alexylva Paradox
#535 - 2012-02-06 13:49:27 UTC
Hmm, that answer does two things for me:
- It strengthens my dislike for strategic voting.
- It shows a reason why candidates that have no ties with large alliances/corps/blocs could indeed be at a disadvantage, at least initially.

3500 votes, that was about 3/5 of GSF, right? And the total amount of EVE population voting for the CSM was 14.25%.

As I see it there no way a group of independant people could organize themselves in a way that would attract a similar amount of votes from people that would otherwise not vote for the CSM, or to organize and monitor voting in a similar way (yes, I am assuming a lot of goons would not have voted for the CSM if they were not asked to vote for one of their members.) They don't have the pre-existing communication lines with large amounts of players (not to mention the command and obey nature of the mentioned groups). This gives large alliances/corps/blocs candidates an advantage other candidates do not have. Candidates belonging to large groups could possibly be voted into the CSM just because they asked their groups to do so.

Do you see this possible advantage as a problem, and if not, why not?

Coordination Channel for Consolidated Space Rescue Cooperation

Open Letter to the Aidonis Foundation Directorate
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#536 - 2012-02-06 20:35:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Well, we could try direct democracy by putting things constantly to referendum, as people suggested. But it would mean what would effectively be a perpetual election.

After the 50th minor issue, all the debating over everything will just wear out the illustrious EVE-O forums (where everyone has their say) and when eventually something big appears, guess who'll be performing coordinated butan push.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Minmatar Citizen 769594585726
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#537 - 2012-02-08 01:58:39 UTC
Why do charismatic and effective leaders keep winning elections? The union of space nobodies demands an answer!
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#538 - 2012-02-08 04:42:08 UTC
Adolf hilmar what would be your final solution to our problems? Force the jews to pay the micro-transaction costs instead of us players? Plus we get the cool goggles and clothes still, but off of jew labor?

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Bromothymol
Old 'n Cranky
#539 - 2012-02-08 04:52:52 UTC
In the last CSM election procedings you (mittens) spoke frequently about the limitations of the CSM, encouraging people who would listen to maintain a realistic view of what the CSM can and can not accomplish. With a year on the CSM under your belt, do you see the role of the CSM any differently now? What are realistic expectations for us plebians for the CSM in the next 12 months, barring any more emergency summits?
Imryn Xaran
Coherent Light Enterprises
#540 - 2012-02-08 13:04:23 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
Quebber wrote:
You have been quite vocal when it comes to the RMT and Botting that it is up to CCP to police there own game how exactly does that reconcile in your own and the CSM's role of "policing" ccp, bringing players together to fight any changes in eve that are seen as wrong or impact the game as a whole.

How can you justify sitting on the fence and saying it is not ours or a players problem, I agree ccp needs to put more effort into dealing with these problems but as my local police man told me "we can not be everywhere, we need your help and comunity support to deal with these issues" If we do not take a stand if leaders do not help set a standard nothing that ccp does will solve this.

This may be their world but it is our home. I have actually left alliances and lost "friends" because I did what I believe was right in standing up to RMT and botters.


It's impossible for me to tell who's a dedicated ratter and who's a 'bot', and it's not my job. I'm not paid by CCP to play GM. If you find a bot, click 'report bot' and the Security Team - who actually has access to logs and evidence - can sort things out. Alliance leaders have no evidence, just hearsay and endless finger-pointing.

Witch hunts accomplish nothing save feed the egos of the ignorant and self-righteous (that's you).


I have read somewhere that your position on this in your alliance is that if you rat on a fellow goon for botting you get kicked.

Please clarify what your personal stance is on this issue and if necessary explain how you justify setting a double standard; one for your fellow goons and one for the rest of the community.