These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Last thread about CSM was closed for not being constructive... Take 2 on the CSM
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gasm
Colossus Enterprises
#181 - 2011-12-05 21:31:00 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
The CSM may be seen as many to be a sham or a PR stunt


Because it is.
Jita Alt666
#182 - 2011-12-05 21:32:21 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
bastrian wrote:
Right, the CSM does NOT reppresent anyone. Only the 0.0 Allys (like RED!) are in the CSM, and due that control they get what they need, not what anyone want. Thats NOT democratic. The CSM currently exsist just because CCP don't want to loose more player. To force anyone to vote could not be the best solution, due the fact that many players have multiple account or bots. But a solution is needed.


The solution to the issue as you see it, as several have pointed out, is for a candidate to step forward and run on a platform that takes high sec and low sec into consideration. No doubt we will have a CSM7 that is populated by some Alliance members, but that is not to say that it HAS to be this way. We certainly can and should elect a representative that is not beholden to Alliance influence in the coming election season.

The bottom line is, for the 5,000 votes that the Mittani obtained in the last election, there were a vast amount of players in high sec that could have outnumbered this figure. The problem is, they lacked the organization and willpower to put forth a viable candidate and elect them to the council. That can't be blamed on the Mittani, as much as everyone may disagree with his politics or tactics.

This is a drawback of the current electoral process, which many could argue favors voting blocs and voting blocs alone. I wholeheartedly disagree that this is the case though.

I truly believe that even if the Mittani obtained a flawless Goon vote, he could be superceded as chairman should enough High sec dwellers unite behind a candidate that isn't beholden to Alliance power. It will take a grassroots movement, spreading virally amongst those that never even log onto the official forums here, but it can be achieved, the numbers are there.

The CSM may be seen as many to be a sham or a PR stunt, but the real PR stunt was the huge amounts of bad press the current CSM6 hoisted upon CCP during the Incarna rollout. They rolled up their sleeves, and pulled no punches exposing the monocle debacle and having every gaming news site reporting on CCP's blunder in record time. Faced with mounting bad PR and a rapid unsubscription rate, CCP had no choice but to acquiesce and listen to players opinions.

Traditionally, the CSM members are seen to represent certain demographics and niche interests, but that is really a misplaced view from everything I've gathered in my time speaking with the CSM about various issues. The CSM can't just wave a magic wand and implement new features for their constituency, they primarily act these days as a sounding board for CCP to approach with their own ideas and seek feedback about new features. They were strongly outspoken about the need to return to Flying in Space, and Crucible is a testiment to that success.

I've personally spoken with many CSM members about issues that could be considered niche by many (Faction Warfare, for one) and found them to be both approachable and responsive, when the proposals made are organized, clear, and represent a deliberated view from the community at large.

Many won't believe this, but in that case the best solution is simply to elect a candidate that is truly free from null sec interests, which would hopefully quell many of the fears that the CSM seats are merely avenues for increased power and influence for one's own Alliance friends.



I disagree with lots I have seen you post on these forums - but that post is very good. Is this the ground floor of your campaign?
Ai Shun
#183 - 2011-12-05 21:42:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Ai Shun
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
,Also supercaps have been nerfed to fix nullsec. And many other things will be done to fix lowsec, which apparently is the only thing it's gonna be fixed whereas hisec dwellers are sentenced to mission to death, without endgame, without new content, without a word from CCP, and without a voice in the CSM.


This is not World of Warcraft or a similar theme-park MMO. This is EVE Online, a sandbox MMO. High-sec players (Myself included, although I am moving to lowsec) needs to make their own content and their own end-game.

What is the real agenda you are pushing by distorting the truth so much? What do you really want?
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
#184 - 2011-12-05 21:43:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Ten Bulls
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
In terms of governments, you have a bureaucracy that doesn't change and only one or two choices of pretty similar candidates who aren't making long term plans because they are not rewarded if the plans work.

In general, people don't know the candidates, have no real way to gauge their abilities and they win on charisma - not aptitude.

We need technocratic solutions.


In RL most people choose between party representatives. The party is rewarded for making long term plans (or existing long term).

In EVE, we have a bunch of independents from HiSec going up against organized voting blocks from 0.0

Solution is for a group of candidates to form a loose party, each select a "portfoilio" and focus on it, and recommend players vote for other candidates from within their party to represent their niche interests.
eg. a group that has specialists in each of
- Missions
- Piracy
- Factional Warfare
- Wormholes
- 0.0

By specializing in one area its easier to attract players who focus on that area, and by affiliating themselves with other specialists they get credibility.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#185 - 2011-12-05 21:45:02 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
You are aware that those were attempts by NULLSEC LOVERS TRYING TO FIX NULLSEC, are you? Nobody ever said "nerf lnullsec to favor hisec", rather the opposite is like a mantra.

Um. No. Anoms weren't nerfed by "nullsec lovers", nor were JBs nerfed by "nullsec lovers".

JBs were portrayed as the one thing which was used to ~project power~ by travelling from one side of the universe to the other, fighting, and travelling back again, when literally everyone who has actually fought a war knows of such things as ~staging systems~. You know, systems close to where the war is actually at.

The anomalies were nerfed by CCP, and I don't remember CSM5 going "you know, it might be a tad too much". 6 months later, tons of people had said **** it and went and did incursions instead. End result? A 0.0 that's empty as ****, further excaserbating the problem the JB nerf was supposed to fix.

Nullsec lovers my ******* arse. There's absolutely no way I'll accept that those changes were advocated by nullsec lovers, because the only thing those changes did, was make life shittier for those who try to live there, and for those who maintain it.

Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Also supercaps have been nerfed to fix nullsec. And many other things will be done to fix lowsec, which apparently is the only thing it's gonna be fixed whereas hisec dwellers are sentenced to mission to death, without endgame, without new content, without a word from CCP, and without a voice in the CSM.

I'm going to assume you know of the concept of prioritization. Fix what's the most ****** up first, then move on to the next ****** up thing.

Nullsec was heading towards hard stagnation, and we're still not out of the woods. I'm hoping the next patch'll fix a lot of it so having a proper war is more than just a "smash this system with a huge blob, now smash this system with a bigger blob, now smash this system with a bigger blob again", so EVE can start generating some good oldfashioned war drama again, which'll entice more players to start playing in the hopes of being part of this epic content.

PS: if CCP is as behind EVE right now as I hope they are, the next expansion'll be akin to apocrypha, which had content for both those who want danger and those who want more carebeary stuff to do. But by all means, be a negative ninny and proclaim the CSM and CCP the harbinger of doom, just because you haven't read much of what f.ex vile rat has been talking about.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Ai Shun
#186 - 2011-12-05 21:46:23 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Many won't believe this, but in that case the best solution is simply to elect a candidate that is truly free from null sec interests, which would hopefully quell many of the fears that the CSM seats are merely avenues for increased power and influence for one's own Alliance friends.


Hans, if you want to try for a CSM position or if you know somebody who can I'll help with the campaign. Even if it is only to donate ISK or to advertise via bio / website.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#187 - 2011-12-05 21:53:10 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Many won't believe this, but in that case the best solution is simply to elect a candidate that is truly free from null sec interests, which would hopefully quell many of the fears that the CSM seats are merely avenues for increased power and influence for one's own Alliance friends.

Show me someone who's not pants on head ******** about game mechanics and has good ideas about how to extend hisec, and I'll personally send one vote that way. I'm pretty certain, however, that there'll be whines about how the CSM is a mostly nullsec CSM until the majority is from hisec. Nevermind that chances are nullsec representatives most likely were hisec dwellers themselves at some point, and can actually recognize a good idea when they see one.

Contrary to what some ninnies might believe, people in nullsec actually does also want hisec to be a place to actually play and have fun, because the more people there are in hisec, the more financially stable CCP is, and the more people they can hire to make more content for all avenues of EVE.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Jita Alt666
#188 - 2011-12-05 21:55:26 UTC
Ai Shun wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Many won't believe this, but in that case the best solution is simply to elect a candidate that is truly free from null sec interests, which would hopefully quell many of the fears that the CSM seats are merely avenues for increased power and influence for one's own Alliance friends.


Hans, if you want to try for a CSM position or if you know somebody who can I'll help with the campaign. Even if it is only to donate ISK or to advertise via bio / website.


Called it. This thread is ground floor of a future Internet spaceship politicians campaign. The question for you Ai Shun is: is Hans John or Phil?
Ai Shun
#189 - 2011-12-05 22:01:50 UTC
Jita Alt666 wrote:
Called it. This thread is ground floor of a future Internet spaceship politicians campaign. The question for you Ai Shun is: is Hans John or Phil?


Now you are scaring me. With Phil we'd see the income redistributed to everyone and we'd all be poor, but equally so. Under John it would be pretty much business as usual, but before long we'd have jump fees, our Starbases would be partially owned by McDonalds and KFC and ... Lol

There are enough people in here enlightened enough to understand that if they want a CSM with High-sec representation they need to organise it themselves. The OP misses that entirely, but I can't help that.

So why not start something?

Who would you classify Hans as?
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#190 - 2011-12-05 22:03:34 UTC
Phoenix IV wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
I think it will be interesting to see how the CSM evolves or even survives going forward.

For example, I think next election results will be very similar to the last elections. The large alliance powerblocks have a much better mechanism for motivating voting blocks than anyone trying to gain the support of the indepentent high sec or care bear voter. Even if the "silent majority" of high sec care bears get motivated to vote it isn't clear how one candidate is going to reach them to gain their support. Ther forums definitely don't work.

The other factor is that I believe CCP is taking the CSM less seriously after finally realizing the huge bias the current CSM has exhibited. I think they realize that a power block nul sec focused CSM will not produce a game that could ever climb out of nitch status. Down that road madness lies.

So I'm not sure there even is a next CSM. I posted asking CCP to clarify the role of the CSM or even its future existance in Jita Park and never got a response.

If you want the CSM to evolve it will require finding a way to engage the current high sec crowd and to get them to support a slate of candidates to balance the CSM. The votes are there if someone can find a way to reach them. If CCP sees that the CSM is more representative of the true cross section of Eve they may continue to value thier feedback. However if the CSM stays a null sec tool for power block alliance influence I doubt CCP will continue the Icelandic periodic shark eating parties for a power elite to smooze. They will slowly back away and finally pull the plug on the CSM experiement.

It is kind of funny because it looks like in the end CCP got exactly the kind of CSM that their game, which encourages such bad behavior would create! A sort of Eve meta-scam! CCP must have seen this in Jta local, "Game companies! Send me free trips to Iceland and listen to me about your game design and I'll contract you a million new subscribers!!"

Can't wait to see how it turns out.

Issler


The "silent majority" doesn't exist but it is a good excuse for loser politicians (spaceship politicians too). If you can't motivate people to vote for you, you don't deserve anything.
Hi-sec player numbers' importance is overrated, a large part of them are alts of 0.0 and low-sec players (thanks to the "balanced" risk/reward ratio between hi-sec, low-sec and 0.0).

I think CCP takes the CSM seriously, "pulling the plug off" is wishful thinking. This CSM did a good job to stop the madness of the last 2 years.

p.s. Sorry if this sounds like a personal attack, but honesty first. Smile


If you are talking about my successes and failures in the CSM elections I've done better than most that have ran so I don't see this as an attack.

As to your other points, 85% didn't vote, that makes them both "silent" (not voting) and a majority (more than half).

I also love it when folks discount the high sec independent player or care bear as just an alt of some nul sec player. I know from personal experience that to be very unlikely. So unless you can cite some source in CCP with hard data to support your assertion I have to call you out as wrong about that.

As to not taking the CSM as seriously the CEO said it himself

Quote:
But some of my concerns right now relate to whether the CSM is maybe focused on a particular aspect of the game and I'm starting to get feedback from players that they worry the CSM is too pre-occupied by a certain playstyle. That might mean we may need to change the structure, but definitely the CSM has worked as a feedback tool greatly throughout the years. We will have them over at the end of the year, after everything that's gone on, and we will have a chance to talk about that. We'll just see where we are and take it from there.


Makes me think the influence of the CSM is being revisited and CCP is concerned with the lack of broad player focus of the current CSM. Pull the plug, I think that is possible if the CSM continues to represent a minority player interest.

Issler
Ai Shun
#191 - 2011-12-05 22:10:45 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
Quote:
But some of my concerns right now relate to whether the CSM is maybe focused on a particular aspect of the game and I'm starting to get feedback from players that they worry the CSM is too pre-occupied by a certain playstyle. That might mean we may need to change the structure, but definitely the CSM has worked as a feedback tool greatly throughout the years. We will have them over at the end of the year, after everything that's gone on, and we will have a chance to talk about that. We'll just see where we are and take it from there.


Makes me think the influence of the CSM is being revisited and CCP is concerned with the lack of broad player focus of the current CSM. Pull the plug, I think that is possible if the CSM continues to represent a minority player interest.


Read it and saw:

"Yeah, some players are complaining about the CSM. The CSM works well as a feedback tool, so we're not going to do anything crazy. We'll have a chat about it at the year-end meeting with the CSM."

I wouldn't paint that as dire as you seem to want it to be.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#192 - 2011-12-05 22:24:49 UTC
This thread is making me glad I decided not to run for CSM. I guess "glad" isn't the word. Vindicated, perhaps. It's amusing how the people who complain the loudest about the state of politics are the quickest and loudest in taking any new opportunity to debase the level of discourse right down to the level that they decry.


The biggest failing of the CSM is that you people don't deserve it.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Savage Creampuff
Vivid Entertainment Group
#193 - 2011-12-05 22:25:51 UTC
8/10
Thevi Olin
0lin Rouge
#194 - 2011-12-05 22:33:40 UTC
Mocam wrote:

Democracy = 1 person, 1 vote. Where you have multiple account holders - multiple votes... That's no more democracy than stuffing the ballot box IRL. That doesn't balance well with single account holders getting a say.

"Well I spend more..." - translations "buying your way through the game". It would be more like giving all business entities a vote IRL. So someone who owns 20 small businesses would have 20 votes - even if they were simply "legal entities" sitting in some lawyers file cabinet.

Simply put - you figure everyone has tons of accounts but not all do and that is where your "democracy" bullshit comes to light and where "buying votes" shines bright.


Democracy doenst equal 'fair' ; but I understand your point. It's not unlike real life politics imo. When it comes down to power; people buy their way in. I really wonder if it would be possible to find a fair way that everyone will agree on. No matter what the solution is gonna be, in the end a few will represent the many and it will always cause debate on wether or not the few are really a fair representation of the whole community.

Every system has its faults. So for lack of a better option, even with all its faults, I accept the current one as being the one I gotta deal with.




Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#195 - 2011-12-05 22:34:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
Ai Shun wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
,Also supercaps have been nerfed to fix nullsec. And many other things will be done to fix lowsec, which apparently is the only thing it's gonna be fixed whereas hisec dwellers are sentenced to mission to death, without endgame, without new content, without a word from CCP, and without a voice in the CSM.


This is not World of Warcraft or a similar theme-park MMO. This is EVE Online, a sandbox MMO. High-sec players (Myself included, although I am moving to lowsec) needs to make their own content and their own end-game.

What is the real agenda you are pushing by distorting the truth so much? What do you really want?


My "agenda", if you want to call it this way, is very simple: I want to keep playing EVE now that I ran out of reasons to do so. Running missions is pretty repetitive and uninteresting unless you aim for a bigger goal and every Lvl4 makes a dent in it. Notch after notch the goal gets closer and closer, then you achieve it, on your own, in your spare time, after months.

Then you achieve your last goal and think: what else is there? And you don't see anything you want to do because you find out that you already were doing the only things you wanted to do in the so-called "sandbox".

Everything else makes you depend on other people (which means you will waste time doing nothing when they are not online, or doing what they want to do no matter how uninteresting is to you); or, takes ages to complete (which means you will not finish it in the time you can spend with it).

How many things in EVE can you FINISH in one hour, are fun to do (aka imply blowing stuff in creative ways according to Ishtanchuk Fazmarai's defintion of "fun"), and can be done even if you're the only one around?

Errr... missions.

So now that I ran out of a reasons to keep grinding the same bloody missions for the 2,000 th time, now that i can't owe any more expensive ship without putting a big "Officer Pinata!" sign on it, now that no other ships will make grinding faster, what is left?

Errr... tuning your avatars.

Great! I LOVE beautiful women! Creating pictures of them is fun! But, there are so few choices... clothes are so ugly... and nobody sees you, nobody appreciates "hey, nice way to dress your toon"... but, Incarna is coming! And, bingo!, the NEx store! Woaaah, new clothes, heels, boots! Until it turns they are as expensive as a faction batlteship, which makes no sense and makes grinding for them a bloody chore. They are not THAT fun, you know?

Then Crucible comes with zero extra fun, zero promises of it coming, and it turns everyone is very busy with nullsec, and CCP apologyzes for bginign Baribi sin space to nullsec overlords' EVE.

So i make some noise before being forced to leave from starvation of fun. it's better than just hit the door.

I LOVE this game. But after three years grinding missions is about time I get something else to do. 100 channels and nothing on, something is very missing with EVE's sandbox, and it's called "have fun in that single precious hour".

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
First Lieutenant Dan
Doomheim
#196 - 2011-12-05 22:37:56 UTC  |  Edited by: First Lieutenant Dan
I would post this in your thread, but there is way too much blue patrolling the forums. So I'll just leave you with this. It speaks volumes about the people who use 1k word posts.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#197 - 2011-12-05 22:45:27 UTC
Who are John and Phil??

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
First Lieutenant Dan
Doomheim
#198 - 2011-12-05 22:46:58 UTC
Can I help you?
Handsome Hussein
#199 - 2011-12-05 22:57:03 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
How many things in EVE can you FINISH in one hour, are fun to do (aka imply blowing stuff in creative ways according to Ishtanchuk Fazmarai's defintion of "fun"), and can be done even if you're the only one around?

Errr... missions.

No. Let's take this little low-sec wannabe over here <- as an example.

1. I can go out and roam low-sec hotspots in my failfit, likely get blown up, and have some fun. I usually do this while drunk and I don't lose pods. At least to normal things. That one time where I clicked on the title of the box instead of the warp-to and collapsed the view while talking to my girl stands out.

2. Scan down and log out in a wormhole. Next time I log in, I can see if it's worth farming a bit or maybe find an exit and see where that leads. Maybe harvest some gas in there.

3. Roam around low-sec looking for exploration sites.

4. Run some anoms. Bonus points if you do this in a pipeline system.

5. Gank some hapless knob or do some can-flipping, good times.

6. Start up some build orders from all the mission junk I salvaged plus a little extra from the market. Hey look, next time I log in I have two new 'Canes or a ton of Thrashers I built myself (no, they're not free, but who gives a ****).

7. Fly the pipe into Syndicate sporting the most expensive implants I can afford (+4s) to do some ninja-ratting. This is great simply for the tension.

8. Adjust market orders. I've never done this, I don't have a head for the market.

9. And so on...

Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
I LOVE this game. But after three years grinding missions is about time I get something else to do. 100 channels and nothing on, something is very missing with EVE's sandbox, and it's called "have fun in that single precious hour".


Your problem is that you're so risk-adverse you shouldn't be playing EVE.

Leaves only the fresh scent of pine.
Handsome Hussein
#200 - 2011-12-05 22:58:12 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Who are John and Phil??

Dude, your avatar gets creepier every time I turn around.

Also: I'd vote for you, you're smarter than the average bear.

Leaves only the fresh scent of pine.