These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why CSM?

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#201 - 2014-02-03 03:04:49 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
Darek Castigatus wrote:
CSM member using insider info for market speculation while drunk one night after a CSM session, which they admitted, were censured for and kicked off the council.


I wasn't aware of this, but that's rather hilarious.

Also -- kind of unsurprising, in a sad way.

"guys the csm is fully corrupt and there's so many examples of this"
"i was not aware of the one time a csm member used insider information for ingame advantage"
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#202 - 2014-02-03 03:09:22 UTC
i'll also point out that you're referencing ~hard evidence~ which was supplied by d3 in a breach of nda

and even if taken as true would show that internal affairs is doing their job properly Straight which is a complete non-scandal
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#203 - 2014-02-03 14:03:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
Benny Ohu wrote:
i'll also point out that you're referencing ~hard evidence~ which was supplied by d3 in a breach of nda

and even if taken as true would show that internal affairs is doing their job properly Straight which is a complete non-scandal


hahahahhaa

this is like saying that a company that regularly dumps toxic chemicals into rivers is totally fine because they regularly fire the specific individuals doing the dumping.

the problem happened at the toxic dumping step, not the firing step.
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#204 - 2014-02-03 15:21:19 UTC
awaiting indications of a trend since the number of people who abused their position at ccp is at a grand total of one

and, uh, some uncorroborated 'logs' coughed up by a csm who then got his arse banned for it vOv
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#205 - 2014-02-03 15:24:19 UTC
even then, is two people 'regularly'? Roll
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#206 - 2014-02-03 15:33:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
Benny Ohu wrote:
even then, is two people 'regularly'? Roll


I mean, we also have that tidbit about the CSM member who was station trading with insider knowledge. That puts it up to 3, if you are talking about CCP in general rather than just CCP developers (I do consider CSM members to a be a part of CCP, but they are not developers).

Even if it was a thousand people who got caught, you could still use the argument that it's "just a coincidence."

Still waiting for evidence that CSM's actually do anything useful. Last I heard they went to Iceland to look at novelty condoms in tourist shops.
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#207 - 2014-02-03 15:41:16 UTC
... which you had no idea of until now

ok so we have one guy, who screwed up before there was an IA team
one other guy who was detected and caught
and some crap posted by a disgraced csm who frankly was useless anyway (that was his thing, you know)

yep this is solid evidence of the entire csm being corrupt and acting only in their own interests better pack it up now

looks like you're all rumbled thanks to the efforts of the pinky hops the world's greatest detective

who, uh, apparently can't use google yet
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#208 - 2014-02-03 15:47:58 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
yep this is solid evidence of the entire csm being corrupt


Uh, the point was that there is regularly corrupt behavior at CCP.

The fact that CSM is 100% useless is a separate (but related) issue.

Benny Ohu wrote:
who, uh, apparently can't use google yet


Were you the one who just eve-mailed me asking for a link of the IA document because you couldn't find it yourself on google?
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#209 - 2014-02-03 15:52:39 UTC
once, you mean. as in, it happened one time.

and one csm. who bought a whole lot of the wrong material. and mynnna, who asked about supercaps. Evil
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#210 - 2014-02-03 15:58:56 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
once, you mean. as in, it happened one time.


We just concluded it happened at least three times.

Probably more, considering it's highly unlikely that we are aware of every single instance of misconduct.

You do say the number "one" a lot. Perhaps that is as high as you can count?

Benny Ohu wrote:
and mynnna, who asked about supercaps.


It was less that they got asked about, and more the timing thereof and the conflict of interest.

He asked about them at the very beginning of a broad scale discussion of overall balance, while representing a coalition that is advantaged by supers being weakened.

So yeah, when somebody is on some committee of some kind, and the first thing they do in a big broad discussion is narrow down the focus to something that is basically irrelevant to the community at large, but specifically relevant to their own special interests...

It's pretty easy to conclude that there's some hefty bias.

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#211 - 2014-02-03 16:08:26 UTC
oh ok i didn't realise we were taking unsubstantitated unverified 'logs' supplied by a discredited source as evidence or reading books into the phrase 'a csm asked about a commonly known balance issue in the balance discussion' i am so sorry
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#212 - 2014-02-03 22:57:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Darek Castigatus
Well Pinky, Im honestly a bit surprised you actually did send me what you claimed was your evidence so kudos to you for that, its kind of a shame it did absolutely nothing to convince me of anything beyond the fact CCPs monitoring system is good at catching people who mess around with stuff for their own or their alliances benefit.

For the benefit of others in the thread heres what concrete information the document I was sent contains.

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

yup, absolutely nothing.

What we have is something that supposedly confirms at some point, no dates are given, someone, who isnt named or identified in any way, inside CCP was flagged during an audit for using backend tools to get information on people involved with their alliance, both friendly and hostile, as well as random pilots they met during play.

Outcome was that whoever this person was they were flagged due to the questionable use of developer access, investigated and removed from CCP. In my eyes they did something questionable, were investigated for it and punished when it became clear they had commited misconduct as opposed to an honest mistake. In my eyes thats the end of the matter and this certainly doesnt support the kind of wide ranging accusations you've been throwing around.

But just to be clear, thank you for actually trying to back up your accusations this time.

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#213 - 2014-02-03 23:14:28 UTC
Darek Castigatus wrote:
Well Pinky, Im honestly a bit surprised you actually did send me what you claimed was your evidence so kudos to you for that, its kind of a shame it did absolutely nothing to convince me of anything beyond the fact CCPs monitoring system is good at catching people who mess around with stuff for their own or their alliances benefit.\


So, wait a second.

First, you say it worked in detecting a specific aspect of corrupt behavior.

Then, you say it "did nothing to convince you of anything beyond that".....

When, the only thing I was saying "beyond that" was that CCP has had problems with developer misconduct. The document was just evidence of another particular example.

So you're basically contradicting yourself.

It either shows an example of misconduct, or it doesn't. You can't have it both ways.
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#214 - 2014-02-04 01:00:41 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:

When, the only thing I was saying "beyond that" was that CCP has had problems with developer misconduct. The document was just evidence of another particular example.


Here, let me point out a couple of places where you did a hell of a lot more than allege they had problems with it.

Pinky Hops wrote:
We just concluded it happened at least three times.

Probably more, considering it's highly unlikely that we are aware of every single instance of misconduct.



Pinky Hops wrote:
Uh, the point was that there is regularly corrupt behavior at CCP.

The fact that CSM is 100% useless is a separate (but related) issue.


And you're accusing me of trying to have it both ways??

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome
Rodrik Vikary
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#215 - 2014-02-14 17:18:10 UTC
I completely disagree that the CSM isn't important to EVE. They are necessary and they do have a say on helping EVE move towards a place the majority of the players would like to see it go. And of course, those elected to the CSM must be the kind of people who have knowledge on some aspects of the game to represent all areas.

That said, of course not everybody agrees with the way some of the people on the CSM think. That's why there are elections, so you can choose the right people for the job.

Also, if there was no CSM and CCP had to listen to everybody saying "this is bad and I want it out of my game", EVE would probably die.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#216 - 2014-02-15 00:40:19 UTC
Midnight Firestarter wrote:
Quote:
CSM was created by CCP after the BoB/Tech2 BPO scandal, as company pubblic relation tools; never been (and never acted) like a playerbase reppresentative. Their role is to bring/promote/advertise company policy and ideas amongst the playerbase. Not the countrary.

With few individuals excpetion, of course (f.i. Hans, but others too).

But in respect of CCP they're mostly a bunch of yesmen; not their fault, is just how the CSM is designed; so it works as intendeed.


Not at all but its it current format 1 of the 10 large alliances sends out a eve mail and there almost guaranteed to be elected.
Thats not democracy thats a rigged system.


It was the giant size of BEEP that always got me a seat three times...... Big smile

The CSM has varied in value to the players based on the particular CSM. Some times they provided a lot of value to the players. I think the last couple of CSMs have made Eve a better place. Each player gets to decide if that is true to them. If you think not voting and getting involved selecting your CSM representatives makes Eve better for you I can't wait to read your argument.

Can't wait for the next elections! Big smile

Issler
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#217 - 2014-02-15 00:50:39 UTC
Kara Trix wrote:
Mangala Solaris wrote:
So if Devs are now acting like those time wasters in supermarkets taking surveys and spending all day to follow up on feedback, when will they develop the game?

Would you like the same from your real life elected officials? Spend all day kissing babies and as a result not (trying) to run a country?



Yes I want Developers to waste their time talking to me about what I want..... very much yes!

I believe they can be creative and do it in a way that doesn't waste their time and still manages to allow ALL players PVE and PVP to have a say in changes, features, balance, etc.

A simple way would be just a log in questioner with only multiple choice responses and then tally up percentages of each question asked.

The dev could see that 80% of the people liked or disliked an item or feature.



So here is a basic question. Do you want a dev team the delivers exactly what you ask for or something surprising/new/fun you hadn't thought of yet.

I personally want a team that delivers the awesome/unexpected based on what I seem to want to do.

We hire CCP to hire get amazing game developers to know how to most deliver a fresh experience. I can hire an intern to balance a spreadsheet, I'd rather hire a professional game designer to create something fresh to engage me!

We've already seen things CCP cooked up we didn't think we'd like that turned out to be great in the end.

Issler
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#218 - 2014-02-15 20:15:31 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
Kara Trix wrote:
Mangala Solaris wrote:
So if Devs are now acting like those time wasters in supermarkets taking surveys and spending all day to follow up on feedback, when will they develop the game?

Would you like the same from your real life elected officials? Spend all day kissing babies and as a result not (trying) to run a country?



Yes I want Developers to waste their time talking to me about what I want..... very much yes!

I believe they can be creative and do it in a way that doesn't waste their time and still manages to allow ALL players PVE and PVP to have a say in changes, features, balance, etc.

A simple way would be just a log in questioner with only multiple choice responses and then tally up percentages of each question asked.

The dev could see that 80% of the people liked or disliked an item or feature.



So here is a basic question. Do you want a dev team the delivers exactly what you ask for or something surprising/new/fun you hadn't thought of yet.

I personally want a team that delivers the awesome/unexpected based on what I seem to want to do.

We hire CCP to hire get amazing game developers to know how to most deliver a fresh experience. I can hire an intern to balance a spreadsheet, I'd rather hire a professional game designer to create something fresh to engage me!

We've already seen things CCP cooked up we didn't think we'd like that turned out to be great in the end.

Issler


totally not just +1ing this

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#219 - 2014-03-05 01:39:58 UTC
CCP Dolan wrote:


The citation is me, I was in all of those summit meetings, and in fact all of the meetings the CSM attends. Additionally, all of those times the minutes said "we'll continue this discussion in a forum thread", I see those too. I talk to our development teams every day. Here is the citation:

"The CSM was involved in every feature released in Rubicon." -CCP Dolan, 2014



The problem is that we don't trust CCP, the supposed reason for the CSM, right? So citing yourself is pretty much meaningless and self serving. That's why the NDA is a double-edged sword - closed door meetings where no third party review is possible. Same exact thing with the white-washed CSM minutes - they can't be trusted as factual because they are compromised by the **NDA**. From the outside the CSM generally just looks like a big rubberstamp that comes equipped with some really, really nice perks.

Now - if you had video where we could see the CSM actually pushing for something and then seeing it come out in the game... there you go.

Dalloway Jones
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#220 - 2014-03-07 03:39:42 UTC
This is a new and original thread topic that I have never seen before.