These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

My intent to run for CSM X

First post
Author
MissBolyai
ElitistOps
Snuffed Out
#21 - 2015-01-09 21:29:58 UTC
Sort Dragon wrote:
Thanks for the free bumps though, its good to have my thread at the top for more exposure they do say any publicity is good publicity even in politics. :)


Not in your case, I'm afraid. The more people know about you is only damaging unless, like I said, you have a large bloc of voters that is going to vote for you no matter what. I am not sure that particular brand of lightning will strike twice.
Sort Dragon
Resilience.
The Initiative.
#22 - 2015-01-09 21:52:54 UTC
MissBolyai wrote:
Sort Dragon wrote:
Thanks for the free bumps though, its good to have my thread at the top for more exposure they do say any publicity is good publicity even in politics. :)


Not in your case, I'm afraid. The more people know about you is only damaging unless, like I said, you have a large bloc of voters that is going to vote for you no matter what. I am not sure that particular brand of lightning will strike twice.


You are welcome to your thoughts but a lot has changed in what is now 2 years. The people voting for me know enough about me to make a decision to vote for me so I will leave it up to them.
Jayne Fillon
#23 - 2015-01-09 22:10:27 UTC
Sort Dragon wrote:
but a lot has changed


It's your reputation against your word.

Quote:
For those people who are afraid that I am again another 0.0 candidate with only care for my own well I am here to tell you that you are mistaken. However I doubt that I could dissuade you from this point so I will not bother trying with this.


Try me.

To me, your OP makes me feel like you've blown this all off as a trivial necessity to be eligible for CSMX, and are completely apathetic towards inspiring people outside our your coalition to vote for you. So let's try this again, and let's keep it really simple.

First question: Why should I vote for you instead of someone like Manfred Sideous, Sion Kumitomo, or Endie von Posts?

Second question: If you are not running as a bloc candidate, are you going to encourage the pilots of your own alliance to educate themselves before voting, or are you going to present your allies a prefilled ballot and ask them to tow the party line?

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.

corbexx
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#24 - 2015-01-09 22:16:22 UTC
whats your thoughts on fighter assign. both in small scale, 20 fighters assigned to a few interceptors and large scale where fighters are assigned in huge amounts (several hundred)
MissBolyai
ElitistOps
Snuffed Out
#25 - 2015-01-09 22:27:55 UTC
Sort Dragon wrote:

You are welcome to your thoughts but a lot has changed in what is now 2 years.

Enlighten me.
Sort Dragon
Resilience.
The Initiative.
#26 - 2015-01-09 22:28:40 UTC
corbexx wrote:
whats your thoughts on fighter assign. both in small scale, 20 fighters assigned to a few interceptors and large scale where fighters are assigned in huge amounts (several hundred)


The game has gone full circle from 4+ years ago where the NC used to assign fighters to fight insurgency and tri, it was a strange mechanic back then and a strange mechanic now. I believe the so called nerf is a band aid and will not change much with the mechanic itself. I think a medium needs to be found where the people assigning fighters put themselves more on the line and the people who use drones are not unbeatable that it kills any potential for fights small to large scale.

I am not sure how to fix it at all but along side the sentries issue I still have a big issue with anyone being able to control anyone elses ships damage. I believe that any type of game play where you can afk and do nothing is not good game design. The more ships on grid the more people have to put them at risk.

The only good I do see from fighter assign is letting 1 side be able to semi even the playing field with another bigger group of players, this however does not outweigh the issues with assign and drone mechanics in general.
Jayne Fillon
#27 - 2015-01-09 23:24:56 UTC
Quote:
any trolling or attempts to derail the thread will be ignored by me.


I'm still expecting an answer, and it would appear so is MissBolyai.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.

Crysantos Callahan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#28 - 2015-01-10 00:15:58 UTC
Jayne Fillon wrote:
Sort Dragon wrote:
but a lot has changed


It's your reputation against your word.



As someone who has been with Sort for the past 2 years I can confirm he did change quite a bit, especially during the last months. Sort might be a **** sometimes and won't win the award for the most popular person in eve - but he's the kind of person you'd want in the CSM because he knows the game, its mechanics and is not afraid to tell his opinion or doubts.

Anyways, everybody has to decide for himself which candidate fits his own expectations of eve best and what he thinks should be the highest priority for 2015.
corbexx
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2015-01-10 00:53:30 UTC
Sort Dragon wrote:
corbexx wrote:
whats your thoughts on fighter assign. both in small scale, 20 fighters assigned to a few interceptors and large scale where fighters are assigned in huge amounts (several hundred)


The game has gone full circle from 4+ years ago where the NC used to assign fighters to fight insurgency and tri, it was a strange mechanic back then and a strange mechanic now. I believe the so called nerf is a band aid and will not change much with the mechanic itself. I think a medium needs to be found where the people assigning fighters put themselves more on the line and the people who use drones are not unbeatable that it kills any potential for fights small to large scale.

I am not sure how to fix it at all but along side the sentries issue I still have a big issue with anyone being able to control anyone elses ships damage. I believe that any type of game play where you can afk and do nothing is not good game design. The more ships on grid the more people have to put them at risk.

The only good I do see from fighter assign is letting 1 side be able to semi even the playing field with another bigger group of players, this however does not outweigh the issues with assign and drone mechanics in general.



tbh i'd rather a simple yes or no on is this broken eg http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=26218828
Vigilanta
S0utherN Comfort
#30 - 2015-01-10 05:09:56 UTC
corbexx wrote:
Sort Dragon wrote:
corbexx wrote:
whats your thoughts on fighter assign. both in small scale, 20 fighters assigned to a few interceptors and large scale where fighters are assigned in huge amounts (several hundred)


The game has gone full circle from 4+ years ago where the NC used to assign fighters to fight insurgency and tri, it was a strange mechanic back then and a strange mechanic now. I believe the so called nerf is a band aid and will not change much with the mechanic itself. I think a medium needs to be found where the people assigning fighters put themselves more on the line and the people who use drones are not unbeatable that it kills any potential for fights small to large scale.

I am not sure how to fix it at all but along side the sentries issue I still have a big issue with anyone being able to control anyone elses ships damage. I believe that any type of game play where you can afk and do nothing is not good game design. The more ships on grid the more people have to put them at risk.

The only good I do see from fighter assign is letting 1 side be able to semi even the playing field with another bigger group of players, this however does not outweigh the issues with assign and drone mechanics in general.



tbh i'd rather a simple yes or no on is this broken eg http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=26218828


You need to read the response, rarely are game mechanics black and white, he addresses your concerns quite directly.

June Ting
Nobody in Local
Of Sound Mind
#31 - 2015-01-10 05:32:51 UTC  |  Edited by: June Ting
Jayne Fillon wrote:
First question: Why should I vote for you instead of someone like Manfred Sideous, Sion Kumitomo, or Endie von Posts?

Diversity on the CSM is important to me. Echoing Jayne's question: what would a CSM without you, but with Manny, Sion, and Endie on it lack due to you not being on it? What unique perspective do you bring that makes you a valued addition to the CSM as opposed to squeezing out a voice from, say, lowsec, w-space, smaller null entities, etc.?

I fight for the freedom of my people.

Seraph IX Basarab
Outer Path
#32 - 2015-01-10 05:41:15 UTC
Jayne Fillon wrote:
Sort Dragon wrote:
but a lot has changed


It's your reputation against your word.

Quote:
For those people who are afraid that I am again another 0.0 candidate with only care for my own well I am here to tell you that you are mistaken. However I doubt that I could dissuade you from this point so I will not bother trying with this.


Try me.

To me, your OP makes me feel like you've blown this all off as a trivial necessity to be eligible for CSMX, and are completely apathetic towards inspiring people outside our your coalition to vote for you. So let's try this again, and let's keep it really simple.

First question: Why should I vote for you instead of someone like Manfred Sideous, Sion Kumitomo, or Endie von Posts?

Second question: If you are not running as a bloc candidate, are you going to encourage the pilots of your own alliance to educate themselves before voting, or are you going to present your allies a prefilled ballot and ask them to tow the party line?



Wow Jayne i'm surprised you didn't ask him if he steal beats his wife. Roll Plus isn't "tow the party line" SOP from entities such as the CFC that backed you last year? Straight


Serious question here to Sort, how do you envision your ideal version of sov mechanics? What would you change? What do you like currently?
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron
The Red Circle Inc.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#33 - 2015-01-10 11:02:33 UTC
Sort Dragon wrote:
corbexx wrote:
whats your thoughts on fighter assign. both in small scale, 20 fighters assigned to a few interceptors and large scale where fighters are assigned in huge amounts (several hundred)

I think a medium needs to be found where the people assigning fighters put themselves more on the line and the people who use drones are not unbeatable that it kills any potential for fights small to large scale.

I am not sure how to fix it at all but along side the sentries issue I still have a big issue with anyone being able to control anyone elses ships damage. I believe that any type of game play where you can afk and do nothing is not good game design. The more ships on grid the more people have to put them at risk.

The only good I do see from fighter assign is letting 1 side be able to semi even the playing field with another bigger group of players, this however does not outweigh the issues with assign and drone mechanics in general.


I'm reading from this that you agree the current ability for Carriers and Supers to assign DPS to a different grid than the one they're on, and just sit next to a POS ready to dump the shield up is something that needs changing- is that an accurate conclusion? Would you be in favour of a straight up removal of the ability to assign fighters to a player on a different grid from yourself?
Sort Dragon
Resilience.
The Initiative.
#34 - 2015-01-10 16:10:10 UTC
June Ting wrote:
Jayne Fillon wrote:
First question: Why should I vote for you instead of someone like Manfred Sideous, Sion Kumitomo, or Endie von Posts?

Diversity on the CSM is important to me. Echoing Jayne's question: what would a CSM without you, but with Manny, Sion, and Endie on it lack due to you not being on it? What unique perspective do you bring that makes you a valued addition to the CSM as opposed to squeezing out a voice from, say, lowsec, w-space, smaller null entities, etc.?


That is an interesting question and to be fair I think Manny is a great candidate this time and I doubt I would be able to get more votes then him anyway. The interesting thing to look at though is that Manfred does not run an alliance that holds sov to live in sov for his members. Sion and Endie however do but at the same time they both look at different aspects in the game, Sion who is very diplomatic and endie who has in the past had his hand in that also.

I would never say that I am better then anyone else because that would be stirring the pot and trying to create a fight with other candidates and this I will not be apart of. I will allow voting to dictate who they believe in the list is better suited. If I do not get in I will accept the people have spoken and possibly try again for csm 11.
Sort Dragon
Resilience.
The Initiative.
#35 - 2015-01-10 16:12:30 UTC
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:
Jayne Fillon wrote:
Sort Dragon wrote:
but a lot has changed


It's your reputation against your word.

Quote:
For those people who are afraid that I am again another 0.0 candidate with only care for my own well I am here to tell you that you are mistaken. However I doubt that I could dissuade you from this point so I will not bother trying with this.


Try me.

To me, your OP makes me feel like you've blown this all off as a trivial necessity to be eligible for CSMX, and are completely apathetic towards inspiring people outside our your coalition to vote for you. So let's try this again, and let's keep it really simple.

First question: Why should I vote for you instead of someone like Manfred Sideous, Sion Kumitomo, or Endie von Posts?

Second question: If you are not running as a bloc candidate, are you going to encourage the pilots of your own alliance to educate themselves before voting, or are you going to present your allies a prefilled ballot and ask them to tow the party line?



Wow Jayne i'm surprised you didn't ask him if he steal beats his wife. Roll Plus isn't "tow the party line" SOP from entities such as the CFC that backed you last year? Straight


Serious question here to Sort, how do you envision your ideal version of sov mechanics? What would you change? What do you like currently?


I myself miss the old pos mechanics for sov, after having been through the whole of dominion I miss the old dynamics of pos sov. The chance to have fights at what could be all times of the day and the chance for both sides to play tug of war. This does not mean that I would go back to fuelling 100+ towers a month to hold sov but I would like something a long the lines that allows people small groups who are not harassing but genuinely want a home in 0.0 to have the ability to do so.

I see that being possible under the rumours of occupancy sov but I can see there being a lot of issues alongside this.
Sort Dragon
Resilience.
The Initiative.
#36 - 2015-01-10 16:15:53 UTC
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote:
Sort Dragon wrote:
corbexx wrote:
whats your thoughts on fighter assign. both in small scale, 20 fighters assigned to a few interceptors and large scale where fighters are assigned in huge amounts (several hundred)

I think a medium needs to be found where the people assigning fighters put themselves more on the line and the people who use drones are not unbeatable that it kills any potential for fights small to large scale.

I am not sure how to fix it at all but along side the sentries issue I still have a big issue with anyone being able to control anyone elses ships damage. I believe that any type of game play where you can afk and do nothing is not good game design. The more ships on grid the more people have to put them at risk.

The only good I do see from fighter assign is letting 1 side be able to semi even the playing field with another bigger group of players, this however does not outweigh the issues with assign and drone mechanics in general.


I'm reading from this that you agree the current ability for Carriers and Supers to assign DPS to a different grid than the one they're on, and just sit next to a POS ready to dump the shield up is something that needs changing- is that an accurate conclusion? Would you be in favour of a straight up removal of the ability to assign fighters to a player on a different grid from yourself?


I do like the ability for assigned fighters to effect fights where the people you are against outnumber you by a huge amount, so no I do not want it completely removed however I do not believe you should be a loud to camp gates with drones assigned or rat with drones assigned. I want to see more to be done to see people be able to use supers and carriers more but at the same time put them in a position of threat.

I myself own a super and I like being able to use it to sometimes level the playing field when I am against a lot of hostiles but at the same time I do not want to kill the fight because people are too afraid of them.
MissBolyai
ElitistOps
Snuffed Out
#37 - 2015-01-11 04:22:31 UTC
MissBolyai wrote:
Sort Dragon wrote:

You are welcome to your thoughts but a lot has changed in what is now 2 years.

Enlighten me.

Lanctharus Onzo
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#38 - 2015-01-12 08:46:30 UTC
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: podcast@capstable.net
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

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

Vigilanta
S0utherN Comfort
#39 - 2015-01-13 06:37:32 UTC
Are you happy with the current state of the jump fatigue mechanics?

Actually I will go into more depth here, I don't think any rational indivdual will argue that having fatigue as a part of the game is bad, but as currently implemented the upper level punishment for generating a large amount of fatigue seems overly harsh. Mainly I am referring to the upper boundry where once you are 30 days of fatigue, if you want to realistically be mobile agian via JB, titan bridge or in a capital you essentially have to sit and wait nearly the full 30 days before doing an activity that generates fatigue. So this in mind how do you feel about the state of jump fatigue mechanics.
Ltd SpacePig
No.Mercy
Triumvirate.
#40 - 2015-01-13 09:36:25 UTC
Vigilanta wrote:
Are you happy with the current state of the jump fatigue mechanics?

Actually I will go into more depth here, I don't think any rational indivdual will argue that having fatigue as a part of the game is bad, but as currently implemented the upper level punishment for generating a large amount of fatigue seems overly harsh. Mainly I am referring to the upper boundry where once you are 30 days of fatigue, if you want to realistically be mobile agian via JB, titan bridge or in a capital you essentially have to sit and wait nearly the full 30 days before doing an activity that generates fatigue. So this in mind how do you feel about the state of jump fatigue mechanics.


This is something that i want changed to. The idea was to stop rapid movement over large distances, but giving someone a 30 day punishment where that player can't use jb's or jump drives is way to harsh. It should be max a few days or a week at the most. This would still achieve the intent but wont completely handicap a player for a unreasonable amount of time.