These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

So I'm going over the CSM votes and politics and I notice:

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lilly Naari
Enclave Security Forces
#1 - 2014-04-14 17:24:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Lilly Naari
That Mynnna from Goonswarm is a permanent CSM council member.

While I have nothing against Goonswarm, I feel that allowing any representative to have a permanent spot of the council is counter productive to the point of said council.

A vote for the Council to choose the members is just that, why even offer a vote if demographics can have permanent "Attendees" and council members? If this is going to be democratically based, every member must have the ability to lose their spot and be replaced.


Goonswarm is one of the largest and most powerful alliances in Eve, and while they are welcome to play their game as they wish, it is unfair and counter productive to other alliances, the political system itself, and the very people of Eve to have a single corporation or alliance maintain a permanent spot on the council, no matter their contributions or lack there of.

This needs to be addressed immediately and ALL permanent residents and attendees to this council removed ASAP to restore a fair, and proper political democratic atmosphere.


Or CCP you need to remove the Vote system, because honestly it's a pointless system when certain power blocs can not be replaced by any means, popular vote or not.

Especially, If your just going to show favoritism and ensure that 1 or more Alliances can never be removed from the council. No matter what the vote says or popular opinion

And this is a clear sign of favoritism, and Violates the very Eula you all are supposed to enforce as it shows the Devs and CCP itself Clearly and definitively support an in game Alliance. Making the game pointless to play and unfair in all aspects.

I should not have to bring up the whole BoB scandal as an Example. But you all should remember how badly that went for the game as a whole and your company.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2 - 2014-04-14 17:38:22 UTC
+1.

Seriously why? I can't possibly think of why one person would be a permanent member. It doesn't really matter anyway since CFC has 40k votes x 3 for 120k votes in total. So they're guaranteed a spot anyway, but this way they're guaranteed 2.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#3 - 2014-04-15 15:04:56 UTC
Lilly Naari wrote:
That Mynnna from Goonswarm is a permanent CSM council member.


Do you mean that he (and the terribad attention-craving blogger) are both entitled to attend all the CSM summits as they placed 1st and 2nd in the last election? If so, working as intended.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Lilly Naari
Enclave Security Forces
#4 - 2014-04-15 15:32:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Lilly Naari
admiral root wrote:
Lilly Naari wrote:
That Mynnna from Goonswarm is a permanent CSM council member.


Do you mean that he (and the terribad attention-craving blogger) are both entitled to attend all the CSM summits as they placed 1st and 2nd in the last election? If so, working as intended.


No I mean permanent as in even if they are not voted in they still retain their postions on the council, as is obvious by the huge bold letter that say say "Permanent Attendee / CSM" Next to their names on the list.

Being a "Current" member because you won an election, is not the same as being a "Permanent member".

Granted Goonswarm will never lose the election as they Basically own CCP these days, But still, listing it publicly even if you do rig the election is just ********.
Jaun Pacht-Feng
Doomheim
#5 - 2014-04-15 15:46:10 UTC
Welcome to EVE!

The CSM is literally one sided with CCP and it always will be!

I'm very impressed that mynnna is even running a campaign! Might as well say "I'm getting in regardless of what anyone says, don't bother."

"Go Goon or Go Home"

Perfect description of the biggest problem with Eve. 
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#6 - 2014-04-15 15:52:06 UTC
Lilly Naari wrote:
admiral root wrote:
Lilly Naari wrote:
That Mynnna from Goonswarm is a permanent CSM council member.


Do you mean that he (and the terribad attention-craving blogger) are both entitled to attend all the CSM summits as they placed 1st and 2nd in the last election? If so, working as intended.


No I mean permanent as in even if they are not voted in they still retain their postions on the council, as is obvious by the huge bold letter that say say "Permanent Attendee / CSM" Next to their names on the list.

Being a "Current" member because you won an election, is not the same as being a "Permanent member".

Granted Goonswarm will never lose the election as they Basically own CCP these days, But still, listing it publicly even if you do rig the election is just ********.


You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

Mynna is a Permanent Attendee, not a Permanent Member. If they were a permanent member, do you really think we'd have a ballot option to vote for them?

All CSM members are elected to the CSM. There are no permanent player positions on the CSM.

Members with a large fan base (like prominent CFC members with 25,000 players supporting them), will routinely get voted onto the CSM. That's how a democracy works.
Lilly Naari
Enclave Security Forces
#7 - 2014-04-15 16:17:34 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Lilly Naari wrote:
admiral root wrote:
Lilly Naari wrote:
That Mynnna from Goonswarm is a permanent CSM council member.


Do you mean that he (and the terribad attention-craving blogger) are both entitled to attend all the CSM summits as they placed 1st and 2nd in the last election? If so, working as intended.


No I mean permanent as in even if they are not voted in they still retain their postions on the council, as is obvious by the huge bold letter that say say "Permanent Attendee / CSM" Next to their names on the list.

Being a "Current" member because you won an election, is not the same as being a "Permanent member".

Granted Goonswarm will never lose the election as they Basically own CCP these days, But still, listing it publicly even if you do rig the election is just ********.


You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

Mynna is a Permanent Attendee, not a Permanent Member. If they were a permanent member, do you really think we'd have a ballot option to vote for them?

All CSM members are elected to the CSM. There are no permanent player positions on the CSM.

Members with a large fan base (like prominent CFC members with 25,000 players supporting them), will routinely get voted onto the CSM. That's how a democracy works.


And? Whats the difference? If he or she has a permanent spot there, then she is free while there to sew her or his sides influence among the other CSM. So no, there is no difference between an Attendee and a member. Beyond words. The result is the same. Someone who was not voted into the CSM is still present and able to influence the CSM.

If she is always voted in great, I could give a rats ass less, but the day she isn't and for whatever reason shows up to the council like she was, that's wrong, and that's really my point.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#8 - 2014-04-15 16:32:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Gizznitt Malikite
Lilly Naari wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Lilly Naari wrote:

No I mean permanent as in even if they are not voted in they still retain their postions on the council, as is obvious by the huge bold letter that say say "Permanent Attendee / CSM" Next to their names on the list.

Being a "Current" member because you won an election, is not the same as being a "Permanent member".

Granted Goonswarm will never lose the election as they Basically own CCP these days, But still, listing it publicly even if you do rig the election is just ********.


You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

Mynna is a Permanent Attendee, not a Permanent Member. If they were a permanent member, do you really think we'd have a ballot option to vote for them?

All CSM members are elected to the CSM. There are no permanent player positions on the CSM.

Members with a large fan base (like prominent CFC members with 25,000 players supporting them), will routinely get voted onto the CSM. That's how a democracy works.


And? Whats the difference? If he or she has a permanent spot there, then she is free while there to sew her or his sides influence among the other CSM. So no, there is no difference between an Attendee and a member. Beyond words. The result is the same. Someone who was not voted into the CSM is still present and able to influence the CSM.

If she is always voted in great, I could give a rats ass less, but the day she isn't and for whatever reason shows up to the council like she was, that's wrong, and that's really my point.


I'm trying to be civil, and not make fun of you. Please read the following, and become EDUCATED. In the future, please do a little research on the topics you are posting on so you have an INFORMED opinion, rather than perpetuating rumors and unsubstantiated bullshit.

♦ All members of the CSM MUST be voted ONTO the CSM every election cycle.
♦ There are 14 members of the csm, determined by the STV voting system.
♦ There are 2 of the 14 members designated as permanent attendees, again determined by the STV voting system.

From the CSM Whitepaper:

Quote:
ATTENDANCE AT CSM SUMMITS AND FANFEST

At least twice a year, CCP will convene multi-day summit meetings in Reykjavik; in addition, each year CCP holds its FanFest convention. Seven members of the CSM attend these events in person. The members who attend in person will be determined as follows:

• The two CSM members elected with the highest ranking from the election, who are able to attend, will
be present at both summit meetings and FanFest. (aka Permanent Attendees)

• The other five positions will be decided upon by CCP in cooperation with the CSM, based on their
activity on the CSM and their expertise as it relates to the expected topics of discussion.


Now, apologize for making such an ill informed post and request the thread be locked as to not perpetuate your misinformed statements.
Lilly Naari
Enclave Security Forces
#9 - 2014-04-15 16:50:14 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Lilly Naari wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Lilly Naari wrote:

No I mean permanent as in even if they are not voted in they still retain their postions on the council, as is obvious by the huge bold letter that say say "Permanent Attendee / CSM" Next to their names on the list.

Being a "Current" member because you won an election, is not the same as being a "Permanent member".

Granted Goonswarm will never lose the election as they Basically own CCP these days, But still, listing it publicly even if you do rig the election is just ********.


You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

Mynna is a Permanent Attendee, not a Permanent Member. If they were a permanent member, do you really think we'd have a ballot option to vote for them?

All CSM members are elected to the CSM. There are no permanent player positions on the CSM.

Members with a large fan base (like prominent CFC members with 25,000 players supporting them), will routinely get voted onto the CSM. That's how a democracy works.


And? Whats the difference? If he or she has a permanent spot there, then she is free while there to sew her or his sides influence among the other CSM. So no, there is no difference between an Attendee and a member. Beyond words. The result is the same. Someone who was not voted into the CSM is still present and able to influence the CSM.

If she is always voted in great, I could give a rats ass less, but the day she isn't and for whatever reason shows up to the council like she was, that's wrong, and that's really my point.


I'm trying to be civil, and not make fun of you. Please read the following, and become EDUCATED. In the future, please do a little research on the topics you are posting on so you have an INFORMED opinion, rather than perpetuating rumors and unsubstantiated bullshit.

♦ All members of the CSM MUST be voted ONTO the CSM every election cycle.
♦ There are 14 members of the csm, determined by the STV voting system.
♦ There are 2 of the 14 members designated as permanent attendees, again determined by the STV voting system.

From the CSM Whitepaper:

Quote:
ATTENDANCE AT CSM SUMMITS AND FANFEST

At least twice a year, CCP will convene multi-day summit meetings in Reykjavik; in addition, each year CCP holds its FanFest convention. Seven members of the CSM attend these events in person. The members who attend in person will be determined as follows:

• The two CSM members elected with the highest ranking from the election, who are able to attend, will
be present at both summit meetings and FanFest. (aka Permanent Attendees)

• The other five positions will be decided upon by CCP in cooperation with the CSM, based on their
activity on the CSM and their expertise as it relates to the expected topics of discussion.


Now, apologize for making such an ill informed post and request the thread be locked as to not perpetuate your misinformed statements.


You just basically proved exactly what I was saying is correct.

Those 2 are permanent attendees at every summit and meeting or gathering. While the others are not. Why even have a full CSM councile if only 2 people are going to be able to express their opinions in totality?

Also there should be a limit to how many consecutive terms an "Alliance, or Organization" can serve on the council. In order to maintain a fair representation of all of the individuals, corporations, and Alliances in Eve.
Cannibal Kane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2014-04-15 16:54:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Cannibal Kane
Lilly Naari wrote:


You just basically proved exactly what I was saying is correct.

Those 2 are permanent attendees at every summit and meeting or gathering. While the others are not. Why even have a full CSM councile if only 2 people are going to be able to express their opinions in totality?

Also there should be a limit to how many consecutive terms an "Alliance, or Organization" can serve on the council. In order to maintain a fair representation of all of the individuals, corporations, and Alliances in Eve.


Are you for real?

All CSM members are elected. The highest rankings of the elected (Most Votes) CSM members must always be present at both summit meetings.

Once again if it has not sunk in yet. The 2 highest ranking members of the elected CSM must be permanent fixtures at both summits. You do know how they choose the highest ranking members right? I am sure you do since as you mentioned, you have been around since the beta.

If you wantI can go buy some crayons and it for you if it will help make you understand.

Are you just picking the part you want to be true and ignoring everything else? It is not that hard to understand.

And with your last statement... Now you suddenly move the goal post as other have mentioned before. What game are you playing at?

"Kane is the End Boss of Highsec." -Psychotic Monk
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#11 - 2014-04-15 17:01:47 UTC
Lilly Naari wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

I'm trying to be civil, and not make fun of you. Please read the following, and become EDUCATED. In the future, please do a little research on the topics you are posting on so you have an INFORMED opinion, rather than perpetuating rumors and unsubstantiated bullshit.

♦ All members of the CSM MUST be voted ONTO the CSM every election cycle.
♦ There are 14 members of the csm, determined by the STV voting system.
♦ There are 2 of the 14 members designated as permanent attendees, again determined by the STV voting system.

From the CSM Whitepaper:

Quote:
ATTENDANCE AT CSM SUMMITS AND FANFEST

At least twice a year, CCP will convene multi-day summit meetings in Reykjavik; in addition, each year CCP holds its FanFest convention. Seven members of the CSM attend these events in person. The members who attend in person will be determined as follows:

• The two CSM members elected with the highest ranking from the election, who are able to attend, will
be present at both summit meetings and FanFest. (aka Permanent Attendees)

• The other five positions will be decided upon by CCP in cooperation with the CSM, based on their
activity on the CSM and their expertise as it relates to the expected topics of discussion.


Now, apologize for making such an ill informed post and request the thread be locked as to not perpetuate your misinformed statements.


You just basically proved exactly what I was saying is correct.

Those 2 are permanent attendees at every summit and meeting or gathering. While the others are not. Why even have a full CSM councile if only 2 people are going to be able to express their opinions in totality?

Also there should be a limit to how many consecutive terms an "Alliance, or Organization" can serve on the council. In order to maintain a fair representation of all of the individuals, corporations, and Alliances in Eve.


How unfair is it that the two most Popular candidates among ALL VOTERS are welcome at all meetings. Should we shun the majority of EvE players and put the not-so-popular minority at the all meetings?

And QQ some more about CSM members not getting enough of a voice:
Gee... if only the other CSM members could attend these meetings by Remote Video.
Gee... if only the other CSM members could present their viewpoints directly to CCP in the CSM forum section, or IM channels.
Gee... if only the other CSM members were invited to attend the meetings based on job performance and experience relative to the topics.

And as for term limits: Why? So the capable, competent, and active members of the CSM have to step down? I could see implementing this suggestion if pisspoor CSM members kept getting reelected, but the truth is the CSM is doing a pretty good job, and they have regular new blood. So your term limits really will do more harm than good.

Cannibal Kane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#12 - 2014-04-15 17:07:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Cannibal Kane
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Lilly Naari wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

I'm trying to be civil, and not make fun of you. Please read the following, and become EDUCATED. In the future, please do a little research on the topics you are posting on so you have an INFORMED opinion, rather than perpetuating rumors and unsubstantiated bullshit.

♦ All members of the CSM MUST be voted ONTO the CSM every election cycle.
♦ There are 14 members of the csm, determined by the STV voting system.
♦ There are 2 of the 14 members designated as permanent attendees, again determined by the STV voting system.

From the CSM Whitepaper:

Quote:
ATTENDANCE AT CSM SUMMITS AND FANFEST

At least twice a year, CCP will convene multi-day summit meetings in Reykjavik; in addition, each year CCP holds its FanFest convention. Seven members of the CSM attend these events in person. The members who attend in person will be determined as follows:

• The two CSM members elected with the highest ranking from the election, who are able to attend, will
be present at both summit meetings and FanFest. (aka Permanent Attendees)

• The other five positions will be decided upon by CCP in cooperation with the CSM, based on their
activity on the CSM and their expertise as it relates to the expected topics of discussion.


Now, apologize for making such an ill informed post and request the thread be locked as to not perpetuate your misinformed statements.


You just basically proved exactly what I was saying is correct.

Those 2 are permanent attendees at every summit and meeting or gathering. While the others are not. Why even have a full CSM councile if only 2 people are going to be able to express their opinions in totality?

Also there should be a limit to how many consecutive terms an "Alliance, or Organization" can serve on the council. In order to maintain a fair representation of all of the individuals, corporations, and Alliances in Eve.


How unfair is it that the two most Popular candidates among ALL VOTERS are welcome at all meetings. Should we shun the majority of EvE players and put the not-so-popular minority at the all meetings?

And QQ some more about CSM members not getting enough of a voice:
Gee... if only the other CSM members could attend these meetings by Remote Video.
Gee... if only the other CSM members could present their viewpoints directly to CCP in the CSM forum section, or IM channels.
Gee... if only the other CSM members were invited to attend the meetings based on job performance and experience relative to the topics.

And as for term limits: Why? So the capable, competent, and active members of the CSM have to step down? I could see implementing this suggestion if pisspoor CSM members kept getting reelected, but the truth is the CSM is doing a pretty good job, and they have regular new blood. So your term limits really will do more harm than good.



Gizznitt...

There is no point. Every time somebody points out the obvious they add another ridiculous statement in the hopes it makes their point valid.

He is not interested in what others thinks or has to say not to mention his knowledge for somebody that has been around since beta seems extremely limited.

At this point and though all the other threads he started it is evident he is just trolling.

"Kane is the End Boss of Highsec." -Psychotic Monk
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#13 - 2014-04-15 17:09:12 UTC
Cannibal Kane wrote:

There is no point. Every time somebody points out the obvious they add another ridiculous statement in the hopes it makes their point valid.

He is not interested in what others thinks or has to say not to mention his knowledge for somebody that has been around since beta seems extremely limited.

At this point and though all the other threads he started it is evident he is just trolling.


pretty much...

/thread
Lilly Naari
Enclave Security Forces
#14 - 2014-04-15 17:09:45 UTC
Cannibal Kane wrote:
Lilly Naari wrote:


You just basically proved exactly what I was saying is correct.

Those 2 are permanent attendees at every summit and meeting or gathering. While the others are not. Why even have a full CSM councile if only 2 people are going to be able to express their opinions in totality?

Also there should be a limit to how many consecutive terms an "Alliance, or Organization" can serve on the council. In order to maintain a fair representation of all of the individuals, corporations, and Alliances in Eve.


Are you for real?

All CSM members are elected. The highest rankings of the elected (Most Votes) CSM members must always be present at both summit meetings.

Are you just picking the part you want to be true and ignoring everything else? It is not that hard to understand.


Um.. You just repeated what I said.

I simply added that I think there needs to be a limit on consecutive terms, and a limit on lifetime terms, for Each Alliance, and or Corporation or Organization.
Cannibal Kane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#15 - 2014-04-15 17:15:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Cannibal Kane
Lilly Naari wrote:
Cannibal Kane wrote:
Lilly Naari wrote:


You just basically proved exactly what I was saying is correct.

Those 2 are permanent attendees at every summit and meeting or gathering. While the others are not. Why even have a full CSM councile if only 2 people are going to be able to express their opinions in totality?

Also there should be a limit to how many consecutive terms an "Alliance, or Organization" can serve on the council. In order to maintain a fair representation of all of the individuals, corporations, and Alliances in Eve.


Are you for real?

All CSM members are elected. The highest rankings of the elected (Most Votes) CSM members must always be present at both summit meetings.

Are you just picking the part you want to be true and ignoring everything else? It is not that hard to understand.


Um.. You just repeated what I said.

I simply added that I think there needs to be a limit on consecutive terms, and a limit on lifetime terms, for Each Alliance, and or Corporation or Organization.


There you do it again.

You were focusing on a single person who is always elected making it sound like she is a permanent member. Just because she gets elected as Grizznitt pointed out does not mean she is permanent. The day people decide not to vote for she wont be. But that is not what you said. You were under the false idea that she was a permanent member of the CSM regardless of votes.

Now suddenly you have forgotten that trivial detail after you were proven wrong in your original thread and now suddenly have a problem with the two most popular members being selected to always be at the summit. Move post much? Can't you stick to you original assertion?

"Kane is the End Boss of Highsec." -Psychotic Monk
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#16 - 2014-04-15 17:16:49 UTC
Lilly Naari wrote:
I simply added that I think there needs to be a limit on consecutive terms, and a limit on lifetime terms, for Each Alliance, and or Corporation or Organization.


CCP disagrees, which is why they removed term limits back around the time of CSM 4 or 5.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Lilly Naari
Enclave Security Forces
#17 - 2014-04-15 18:29:22 UTC
Cannibal Kane wrote:
Lilly Naari wrote:
Cannibal Kane wrote:
Lilly Naari wrote:


You just basically proved exactly what I was saying is correct.

Those 2 are permanent attendees at every summit and meeting or gathering. While the others are not. Why even have a full CSM councile if only 2 people are going to be able to express their opinions in totality?

Also there should be a limit to how many consecutive terms an "Alliance, or Organization" can serve on the council. In order to maintain a fair representation of all of the individuals, corporations, and Alliances in Eve.


Are you for real?

All CSM members are elected. The highest rankings of the elected (Most Votes) CSM members must always be present at both summit meetings.

Are you just picking the part you want to be true and ignoring everything else? It is not that hard to understand.


Um.. You just repeated what I said.

I simply added that I think there needs to be a limit on consecutive terms, and a limit on lifetime terms, for Each Alliance, and or Corporation or Organization.


There you do it again.

You were focusing on a single person who is always elected making it sound like she is a permanent member. Just because she gets elected as Grizznitt pointed out does not mean she is permanent. The day people decide not to vote for she wont be. But that is not what you said. You were under the false idea that she was a permanent member of the CSM regardless of votes.

Now suddenly you have forgotten that trivial detail after you were proven wrong in your original thread and now suddenly have a problem with the two most popular members being selected to always be at the summit. Move post much? Can't you stick to you original assertion?


Just because I realize I misunderstood something, and once figuring it out, noticed another issue, does not mean I am going to not post about it.

I despise politics, because honestly their pointless. As those in power will always be those with the most money and members. And therefore any movement political or otherwise will always be biased toward the most powerful entities desires. The same problem that exists in capitalism, exist in every democratic system.

Power corrupts.
Absolute power, corrupts absolutely
Not a single one of the CSM members do not have their own wants and desires in mind, of which will better their alliances and or corps in their own way regardless of the outcome to others.

Change effects everyone, what is good for one, is bad for another, and vice versa. The only time this is false is when a decision can resolutely have a positive effect on everyone involved, which is an impossibility. This being the case individuals delude themselves into believing that what is good for them is good fro everyone. Much like religion does. When in fact the very opposite is generally the truth.

Many people on these forums have made excellent suggestions for in game additions. But the major powers that be if deciding they personally would be damaged by such, even if the game as a whole would be improved, strike them down with majority vote coming form their singular source.
Lykouleon
Noble Sentiments
Second Empire.
#18 - 2014-04-16 00:33:52 UTC
Lilly Naari wrote:
I despise politics, because honestly their pointless. As those in power will always be those with the most money and members. And therefore any movement political or otherwise will always be biased toward the most powerful entities desires. The same problem that exists in capitalism, exist in every democratic system.

Which is, inherently, the core reason why corruption exists because of politics: when an uninformed and uninterested electorate does not actively participate in the political process or disdains the political process due to negative exposure. The only way to prevent the "pointlessness" of politics is actual, active participation in the system, not burying your head in the sand and walking away. Which is also, hilariously enough, the same reason capitalism is viewed as being corruptible by those who disdain it or only passively participate in its course.

Lykouleon > CYNO ME CLOSER so I can hit them with my sword
Mythrandier
Solace Corp
#19 - 2014-04-16 07:35:25 UTC
Lilly Naari wrote:


Many people on these forums have made excellent suggestions for in game additions. But the major powers that be if deciding they personally would be damaged by such, even if the game as a whole would be improved, strike them down with majority vote coming form their singular source.



Just remind me again who was the biggest advocate for the tech nerf?




I really am starting to think that this "person" is in fact a Doomsdale alt.

"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." -  D. Adams.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#20 - 2014-04-16 14:27:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
Lilly Naari wrote:
admiral root wrote:
Lilly Naari wrote:
That Mynnna from Goonswarm is a permanent CSM council member.


Do you mean that he (and the terribad attention-craving blogger) are both entitled to attend all the CSM summits as they placed 1st and 2nd in the last election? If so, working as intended.


No I mean permanent as in even if they are not voted in they still retain their postions on the council, as is obvious by the huge bold letter that say say "Permanent Attendee / CSM" Next to their names on the list.

Being a "Current" member because you won an election, is not the same as being a "Permanent member".

Granted Goonswarm will never lose the election as they Basically own CCP these days, But still, listing it publicly even if you do rig the election is just ********.


Except that that is not what it means. Mynnna has to be voted in the same as anyone else. There is no such thing as an unelected CSM member.

Mynnna was first elected on to CSM8. He hasn't served on any previous CSMs.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
12Next page