These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

I am an Endie standing for CSM X AMA

First post First post
Author
Dirk Action
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#41 - 2014-12-09 13:29:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Dirk Action
Endie von Posts wrote:
Personally, I can only remember this happening once in the last couple of years, but that once was too often, and I hugely regret that it was by my alliance.



It's happened at least three times in recent history that I can remember (Manny, Erotica 1, Lucia Denniard). Just because they're less public incidents than the infamous K.com one, doesn't mean they aren't happening


Endie von Posts wrote:
In fact, Digi is not in the GIA, and his only interaction with our agents is when he bans them and I have to tell him to leave them alone and unban them



So you're influential enough within GSF/CFC to tell him to reverse his decision as an IT guy (let me tell you just how hard that is in my own experiences, sysops are the least receptive people to be told that they're wrong), but not influential enough to either get him to stop doing it altogether or to remove him from the alliance? Because as I said above, his actions are less public now but they still happen, and that's a problem.

You've clearly said that you don't condone what he does, so does that mean others in GSF who are above you do? IIRC there's only 2 more people above you, and that's Mittani and Sion.

like he's already been banned from SA, the GSF homeland, for admitting to collecting personal info on people. Isn't that enough of a smoking gun?
Endie von Posts
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#42 - 2014-12-09 13:51:11 UTC
Dirk Action wrote:

So you're influential enough within GSF/CFC to tell him to reverse his decision as an IT guy (let me tell you just how hard that is in my own experiences, sysops are the least receptive people to be told that they're wrong), but not influential enough to either get him to stop doing it altogether or to remove him from the alliance? Because as I said above, his actions are less public now but they still happen, and that's a problem.

You've clearly said that you don't condone what he does, so does that mean others in GSF who are above you do? IIRC there's only 2 more people above you, and that's Mittani and Sion.

like he's already been banned from SA, the GSF homeland, for admitting to collecting personal info on people. Isn't that enough of a smoking gun?


I cannot ban people and I have to ask to get people unbanned, and every single time I do that it is a lengthy period costume drama.

There is not much more I can do except to repeat that I don't doxx people, I have nothing to do with it (I don't even remember anyone publishing any details about Lucia or Erotica, thankfully) and I disagree with other people doing so. It's not part of the game of Eve I play and it has nothing to do with the CSM. If that is getting boring then I apologise but that's the truth.
Hendrick Tallardar
Doomheim
#43 - 2014-12-10 19:26:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Hendrick Tallardar
Endie von Posts wrote:
it has nothing to do with the CSM.


Arguably it does, as the CSM can push for either policy or game mechanic changes to prevent the sort of out of game harassment being referred to. We saw it with a firm usage of the CCP policies towards out of game harassment when the "Bonus Room" happened as well as with the EVE monument incident. These were out of game acts that CCP deemed detrimental to the community and took action against. CCP were even scolded on video game press sites, much like the Fanfest "suicidegate" as being an example of a community that has problems differentiating between real life and video game land. Is it farfetched to think that collecting, using, or even spreading a player's out of game personal info is just as detrimental? If one player is actively, and even openly admitting to, collecting personal data outside of the game and using that information maliciously as is claimed then it's a problem that CCP and the CSM need to investigate and find a resolution to if they want to keep the "meta game" healthy and available to players. The worst case scenario I can conceive is that if this sort of behavior goes unchecked, an event will happen that will greatly damage the game, the company that makes it, and the players which ultimately see the meta game removed entirely.

In the cited cases, and yes there are others, a player is collecting real life info on others and has been seen spreading that personal info to other players, even if it's a select few. For example there are logs from TheMittani.com's Editor Jabber Channel in which The Mittani himself stated that he had Digi look into and Erotica 1's personal stuff and felt the need to share that information with TMC Editors who weren't involved in the "counter intel" and "spying" game, we were writers/editors discussing Erotica 1's application to join the staff (we unanimously decided not to accept the application). There is little purpose behind being told the personal life details of another player, even if they were banned. You admonish the act of disclosing Manny's personal details on K.com. I can only imagine that, as Dirk stated, the case of Digi supposedly contacting Luccia out of game on a personal form of communication which she claims to never have disclosed would be equally deplorable to you. Again, there's no rhyme or reason for doing any of these things out of game, they don't even really have any context to in-game events or actions. These, among others, are examples of the "meta game" going too far and potentially damaging to the EVE community and it's sandbox gameplay for the sake of one's own internet space pixels.

There was one person elsewhere who poised that if we are to condemn the act of "doxxing" and using out of game personal information to either out the spy, harass, blackmail, or even intimidate them as being wrong then we must equally condemn the act of spying. As the head of the Goon spying group, I would imagine you have some thoughts on this stance. To this person the two can't be separated as the only way to prevent spies is to eventually hit out of game personal information, even if it's not intended. You stated you agree that you dislike "doxxing", so then what would you propose to CCP as a CSM delegate do to allow the act of in-game sandbox behavior such as spying and counter-intel not spill over into out of game actions like the examples listed above?

Edit - Please note that this isn't a "Grr Goons" or "Grr Digi" post in any intended manner (though I personally find Digi to be woefully incompetent in his "space job" given the antics he's been up to). It's a "this is a problem, how do you intend to fix it if you're on the CSM?" post.
Endie von Posts
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#44 - 2014-12-10 21:33:26 UTC
There is no need at all to feel a need to explain why you ask.

If CCP did feel the need to ask the CSM's opinion on this matter I would restate what I've said in my previous answers in the last few pages. If they pushed me for a definitive solution I'd have to hold my hands up and admit that I don't have one. But I think my distaste for anyone that acted like that, and my sanguine reaction if CCP chose to ban someone for publicly intruding on someone's personal life, out of game, should be pretty obvious. It's not something I would feel any desire to defend.
Endie von Posts
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#45 - 2014-12-11 11:16:04 UTC
For any who are interested, I wrote up my assessment of how each of the major blocs and alliances have reacted to Phoebe, with scorecards for each. Some of the results may surprise http://www.endie.net/wordpress/2014/12/alliance-phoebe-scorecards/
Dave Gruber
Xybercon Laboratories
#46 - 2014-12-11 11:18:08 UTC
Well, you've definitely got my vote!
Elizabet Forgrave
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#47 - 2014-12-11 11:45:30 UTC
+1
Mario Putzo
#48 - 2014-12-11 18:48:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
retracted question as it has been answered/sidestepped already
Sanara Estidal
Doomheim
#49 - 2014-12-12 08:42:47 UTC
I think I agree with a lot of what you say in your blogs. Are you planning on doing any of the podcasts? I like to hear the csm candidates needing to answer questions as they come.
Endie von Posts
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#50 - 2014-12-12 08:50:42 UTC
Sanara Estidal wrote:
I think I agree with a lot of what you say in your blogs. Are you planning on doing any of the podcasts? I like to hear the csm candidates needing to answer questions as they come.


Yes, I will do podcasts where invited. I've actually talked about my changes quite a bit on SoZ in this episode: http://episodes.shitonzulu.com/episode1.html
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
The Network.
#51 - 2014-12-16 17:46:54 UTC
Mynnna is leaving some big shoes to fill but Endie's got the chops.

The best part of electing the head of the Goon Intelligence Agency is you never have to sit down and write him an EVE mail to tell him about something; he already knows! He's known since you talked about it in corp chat.

Now that's convenience.

Alek the Kidnapper, Hero of the CSM

Tengu Grib
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#52 - 2014-12-16 20:09:54 UTC
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
Mynnna is leaving some big shoes to fill but Endie's got the chops.

The best part of electing the head of the Goon Intelligence Agency is you never have to sit down and write him an EVE mail to tell him about something; he already knows! He's known since you talked about it in corp chat.

Now that's convenience.


If you want to be absolutely sure he sees it, just send yourself an Eve mail!

Rabble Rabble Rabble

Praise James, Supreme Protector of High Sec.

Schwa Nuts
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#53 - 2015-01-07 13:49:00 UTC
Endie is my favorite writer, and will be #1 on any ballot I see his name on.
Lanctharus Onzo
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#54 - 2015-01-12 08:39:55 UTC
Lanctharus Onzo wrote:
Well hello there!

My name is Lanctharus Onzo and I an one of the co-host and writers of the Cap Stable Podcast.

In early 2014 our podcast interviewed a great majority of the candidates for CSM9 and we will be doing the same for CSM10.

Here is our announcement: http://capstable.net/2014/12/01/council-of-stellar-management-x-call-for-candidate-interviews/

As we stated in the announcement, you can contact us to schedule your one on one interview via any of the following methods:

Email: [email protected]
Twitter: @CapStable
Or via our contact form

We look forward to speaking to you about your particular skill set and expertise in EVE Online and we hope you success in your candidacy.

Sincerely,

Lanctharus Onzo
Co-host & Writer of the Cap Stable Podcast
Military Director, Alea Iacta Est Universal


Hello Endie,

It's been awhile since I posted this and I wanted to find out when you wanted to schedule your CSMX interview that no one will be listening to anyways.

:D

Executive Editor, CSM Watch || Writer, Co-host of the Cap Stable Podcast || Twitter: @Lanctharus

Dave Korhal
Kite Co. Space Trucking
#55 - 2015-01-13 10:19:22 UTC
Endie,

1. In NC's recent Alliance Update, Vince said that "everyone in NC should be working towards owning an SC or Titan." For the major coalitions, it seems like supers have gone from a rare, valuable strategic asset to a mandatory piece of equipment. Do you think this super proliferation is a healthy step in an aging NullSec, or do you think it will stagnate NullSec and make it nigh-impossible to break their fleets and put a dent in the old superpowers' resources?

2. If Goonswarm was started today instead of 8 years ago, would they still be able to establish themselves as one of the major NullSec superpowers? Or would they have been repeatedly crushed by the older NullSec coalitions? What does this say about the current state of NullSec compared to 3-5 years after the game launched?

3. Do you think more NullSec systems should be added to the game? If so, should they follow the same mechanics as the rest of NullSec, or should they have different mechanics to encourage occupancy by different/younger coalitions?

Matt: "Mining is the devil's work. If any of you mine, I will AWOX you."

Vikkiman: "What about Dave?"

Matt: "Dave gets a pass; he's batshit insane."

Speedkermit Damo
Invicta.
Muffins of Mayhem
#56 - 2015-01-13 11:34:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Speedkermit Damo
Endie von Posts wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
What are your goals for the CSM?


My hope is to be able to influence CCP in the direction I have talked about on my blog: an Eve of smaller groups, more frequent and more numerous wars fought between more localised actors. I want to log into TMC or EN24 or Crossing Zebras and see reports from a dozen wars spread across Eve.

This may seem counter-intuitive for someone who has helped build Goonswarm into the dominant actor in one of the two largest blocs the game has ever seen, but I feel passionately that an Eve of smaller groups offers greater chances for more leaders, more new FCs and more content creators. That will be good for us, for the rest of Eve and for the game as a whole.

For this reason I would like to try and influence CCP towards denser populations; towards an Eve that can see smaller groups stand alone and does not drive them into vast webs of neo-feudal relationships.

I think that most players would love to be part of something more human-sized in an Eve where a bunch of plucky new players can decide to take the plunge and grab a piece of nullsec to call their own without renting, without having to get the permission of one bloc and without bowing the knee to the other bloc.

Most importantly, I want to see it be extremely hard to remove an alliance from space as long as they keep turning up and defending it (not just using it, mind!) If someone doesn't defend their space, however then it should not require multiple fleets and masses of supers to swiftly take it from them.


What would a more balkanised Eve mean for the CFC? Does not the existence of the CFC and the "other" big bloc prevent a more balkanised Eve? I guess what I mean is that any changes to the game to bring about a more balkanised Eve must mean breaking the power of coalitions.

How does this sit with you as a senior Goon, and what do you think can be done to balkanise nullsec?

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.

Dave Korhal
Kite Co. Space Trucking
#57 - 2015-01-13 20:29:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Korhal
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
What would a more balkanised Eve mean for the CFC? Does not the existence of the CFC and the "other" big bloc prevent a more balkanised Eve? I guess what I mean is that any changes to the game to bring about a more balkanised Eve must mean breaking the power of coalitions.

How does this sit with you as a senior Goon, and what do you think can be done to balkanise nullsec?


He's already addressed these in his articles on sov.

TL;DR: The giant coalitions exist because it's too easy to take sov; sheer firepower at specific timers is the biggest determining factor in sov, so a few dozen people with supers/T3s could take sov from hundreds of players that don't have similar resources without breaking a sweat. Hence everyone has to band into coalitions with equal firepower just to survive. Remake sov so it's persistence, not firepower, that determines who controls sov, so that a group of 100-200 newbros can force NC to put time & dedication into taking a single system from them (rather than steamrolling them with a dozen supers whenever their reinforcement timers pop), and the gigantic coalitions will no longer be necessary to survive. Once giant coalitions are no longer necessary, they'll fracture because it's a pain in the ass to keep 12,000 people cooperating with each other.

Matt: "Mining is the devil's work. If any of you mine, I will AWOX you."

Vikkiman: "What about Dave?"

Matt: "Dave gets a pass; he's batshit insane."

Speedkermit Damo
Invicta.
Muffins of Mayhem
#58 - 2015-01-14 09:31:53 UTC
Dave Korhal wrote:
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
What would a more balkanised Eve mean for the CFC? Does not the existence of the CFC and the "other" big bloc prevent a more balkanised Eve? I guess what I mean is that any changes to the game to bring about a more balkanised Eve must mean breaking the power of coalitions.

How does this sit with you as a senior Goon, and what do you think can be done to balkanise nullsec?


He's already addressed these in his articles on sov.

TL;DR: The giant coalitions exist because it's too easy to take sov; sheer firepower at specific timers is the biggest determining factor in sov, so a few dozen people with supers/T3s could take sov from hundreds of players that don't have similar resources without breaking a sweat. Hence everyone has to band into coalitions with equal firepower just to survive. Remake sov so it's persistence, not firepower, that determines who controls sov, so that a group of 100-200 newbros can force NC to put time & dedication into taking a single system from them (rather than steamrolling them with a dozen supers whenever their reinforcement timers pop), and the gigantic coalitions will no longer be necessary to survive. Once giant coalitions are no longer necessary, they'll fracture because it's a pain in the ass to keep 12,000 people cooperating with each other.


Good reply, however the question was directed at Endie, and it's his opinions I am interested in.

As far as I can see, the PP nerfs have had little effect on null-sec. It's still in a state of stagnation, and while null is dominated one coalition it always will be. Regardless of any changes to sov CCP makes.

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.

Amyclas Amatin
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2015-01-14 09:57:08 UTC
Endie von Posts wrote:
For any who are interested, I wrote up my assessment of how each of the major blocs and alliances have reacted to Phoebe, with scorecards for each. Some of the results may surprise http://www.endie.net/wordpress/2014/12/alliance-phoebe-scorecards/


I'm not sure how the cfc could have done any better. Could anything less or more really be expected of us?

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"

Endie von Posts
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#60 - 2015-01-21 14:53:49 UTC
Lanctharus Onzo wrote:
[quote=Lanctharus Onzo]Well hello there!
Hello Endie,

It's been awhile since I posted this and I wanted to find out when you wanted to schedule your CSMX interview that no one will be listening to anyways.

:D


Apologies: I have been sick as a dog and really got behind on my posting. I'll PM you to find out what dates suit you.