These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

"That" time of year again.

First post
Author
Jenshae Chiroptera
#1 - 2016-01-09 13:26:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Edit:
A quote from a year ago.
Seven Koskanaiken wrote:

Most people don't vote for CSM because they don't know it exists.

(I spent most of my campaign time last year explaining to High Sec people what CSM is and what they do. That was obviously only a small portion of people because I can't reach them as there are so many solar systems and time zones.)

Arrow CCP could put CSM info into Local same as a MoTD

Gregor Parud wrote:
Frankly, the whole CSM thing has outstayed its welcome and it used more for meta stuff than actual use.


/Edit

Once again, we are approaching the elections for the CSM.

Once again, it will no doubt be largely Goons appointed members.

Once again, we shall have the minority (Null Sec) speaking for the majority (High Sec).

Once again, we will be voting for people people based on what tribe they are in (coalition)

... and yet again, we will be thinking about ourselves when we do this; without regard for whether they actually have the skills and neutral mindset to do a good job.

Thus our carousel will keep on spinning, CCP shall have to take what the CSM put forward with a bucket of salt.
(It seemed from this past year that even when the CSM was being positive and trying to put the brakes on some really bone-headed ideas; that they were completely ignored.)

You can point to a few exceptions yes, like some of the stuff Sugar Kyle has done.
You can harp on about how it is better than nothing and we haven't had another Incarna since we have had the CSM came about.
You can also go on about the daily work they do and ignore why they are motivated to be there and the influence they try and exert.

However, I want you to ask yourselves this:

- Why are you voting for that person?
- Is the CSM influence more gradual and insidious?
- Is the CSM too full of peacocks or selfish agendas to be taken seriously by CCP?
- Is CSM largely a lobby group?
- How can the whole process be improved?
- Are these questions too late?
( ... because the ballot pages are made, CCP's mind is made up and the rest of the year people don't care.)
Ibutho Inkosi wrote:
This CSM election has a reputation of not being very representative. A vast majority of people seem relatively isolated, or limited in their in-game contacts with one another, so it seems like a large leap of faith that anyone would know anyone who runs, or would be known if running themselves. The reputation EVE's CSM has is it has, as a result, been hijacked and is constantly held by a small percentage of well-organized people, and therefore only represents them and their interests.

I have a problem with endorsing situations such as these. I also have a problem with so-called professional people countenancing such conditions. However, when these so-called professionals are a party to exposing their own paying customers to the vagaries of a select few of their paying customers, then things are more than a little strange. This changes the relationship of the company and the customer to one of charlatan and dupe.

It's a black cloud over what otherwise would be a rather positive situation, and also has to be suspect in why things a majority of players seem to clamor for don't seem to be getting any attention at all. Could it be to address such issues runs counter to the wishes of the select few who have hijacked the process? Sadly, in such cases as these, where credibility is breached, one must assume it does.

Thanks for the peppy "lets' all get in there and do something" post. I can see the idealism driving it. Yet, so few players use and read this forum, I doubt it will have the required impact.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
#2 - 2016-01-09 13:50:42 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:

- Why are you voting for that person?
- Is the CSM influence more gradual and insidious?
- Is the CSM too full of peacocks or selfish agendas to be taken seriously by CCP?
- Is CSM largely a lobby group?
- How can the whole process be improved?
- Are these questions too late?



- I'm not

- That sounds like a comparative sentence but it's missing the target of comparison

- No more than this thread

- That's the whole idea

- Elect everyone in New Eden to the CSM

- No, they're just pointless

Perfection is a dish best served like wasabi .

Bumble's Space Log

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#3 - 2016-01-09 14:37:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Once again, the unproven and rather silly notion that there is a “highsec majority” (to say nothing of the outright laughable idea of there being a coherent highsec affiliation that sits in opposition of some equally coherent nullsec affiliation) is bandied about.
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
#4 - 2016-01-09 14:54:37 UTC
I hope only few will vote, those who really want the change for better to happen, those who really want this game to succeed, those who really know the candidates.

You, yes, I am talking about You, think of consequences when you vote. Think about your experience, think about experience of others.

Dont be bamboozled by people talking about nullsec or highsec being the essence of the game, they need to rethink their stance, because we play everywhere as collective. Vote for people that want to play a better game, no matter where they are.
MidnightWyvern
The Bosena Accords
Round Table Assembly
#5 - 2016-01-09 14:58:29 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Once again, the unproven and rather silly notion that there is a “highsec majority” (to say nothing of the outright laughable idea of there being a coherent highsec affiliation that sits in opposition of some equally coherent nullsec affiliation) is bandied about.

Seriously, all of us who live in Null-Sec rarely are on the same page, but High-Sec is worse. So many opinions held by so many people and all of them "The Right Way to do High-Sec".

Rattati Senpai noticed us! See you in the next FPS!

Alts: Saray Wyvern, Mobius Wyvern (Dust 514)

Chopper Rollins
hahahlolspycorp
Brave Collective
#6 - 2016-01-09 15:11:26 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:


- Why are you voting for that person?
- Is the CSM influence more gradual and insidious?
- Is the CSM too full of peacocks or selfish agendas to be taken seriously by CCP?
- Is CSM largely a lobby group?
- How can the whole process be improved?
- Are these questions too late?


- To troll
- No
- Always was
- No
- No idea
- Yes


Goggles. Making me look good. Making you look good.

Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#7 - 2016-01-09 15:18:07 UTC
Welcome to politics. An organized group with unified desires and goals will trounce an unorganized, disparate mass of people any day.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#8 - 2016-01-09 15:28:13 UTC
It's so adorable that there are still players who believe the CSM is relevant.

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.

Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#9 - 2016-01-09 15:38:26 UTC
No offense, but this is the most pseudo-intellectual bullshit that I've read this year.

~

Jace Varus
Lemur Appreciation Society
#10 - 2016-01-09 16:14:09 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Once again, the unproven and rather silly notion that there is a “highsec majority” (to say nothing of the outright laughable idea of there being a coherent highsec affiliation that sits in opposition of some equally coherent nullsec affiliation) is bandied about.


Go to the beta map in-game, and turn to the average number of pilots in space in the last 30 minutes. There you go.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#11 - 2016-01-09 16:25:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Jace Varus wrote:
Go to the beta map in-game, and turn to the average number of pilots in space in the last 30 minutes. There you go.

Just one problem — in fact, the exact same problem as with all those inane claims: it doesn't display players. The mythical majority is just that: a myth, at best born out of bad maths, at worst born out of sheer ignorance and wishful thinking.
Cristl
#12 - 2016-01-09 16:36:40 UTC
Elise Randolph wrote:
No offense, but this is the most pseudo-intellectual bullshit that I've read this year.

It's only the ninth of January though. Give it time and I'm sure we can increase the bullshit factor.
Deitra Vess
Non-Hostile Target
#13 - 2016-01-09 16:44:40 UTC
I don't get why they don't just have it so before you vote you declare your a "high sec player," "wormhole player," ect and then just put people into the csm as part of parties or whatever. Make the number of members divisible by 4 (for each major group) and put for example 3 people in to represent each aspect of the game. We would also see where the majority of the player base resides and they can focus on the areas where the most people are.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#14 - 2016-01-09 17:10:48 UTC
Deitra Vess wrote:
I don't get why they don't just have it so before you vote you declare your a "high sec player," "wormhole player," ect and then just put people into the csm as part of parties or whatever. Make the number of members divisible by 4 (for each major group) and put for example 3 people in to represent each aspect of the game. We would also see where the majority of the player base resides and they can focus on the areas where the most people are.

Because it would be ridiculously easy to rig, and would yield the result that the majority is in null, and that, for some curious reason, all the “high sec candidates” would also be mostly focused on null issues.

The main flaw is that the distinction between those player types is itself pretty nonsensical. Again, they aren't coherent groups; treating them as anything even remotely resembling parties makes no sense because there is no shared opinion or policy outlook. Any pre-selected representation will inherently not be representative and any other representation will only be of those who show up and who organise, which will always be derided as biased and unfair.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#15 - 2016-01-09 17:13:46 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Jace Varus wrote:
Go to the beta map in-game, and turn to the average number of pilots in space in the last 30 minutes. There you go.

Just one problem — in fact, the exact same problem as with all those inane claims: it doesn't display players. The mythical majority is just that: a myth, at best born out of bad maths, at worst born out of sheer ignorance and wishful thinking.


You maybe forgot desperation and butthurt? Big smile

What the "high sec partisans" never face is that a lot of high sec is just our alts. And even worse than that (from their perspective) is that of those who are real high sec players, many of them LIKE null, aspire to null (or low or WH gameplay) and vote for null candidates.

The most vocal high sec posters here suffer from that 'truly false consensus' problem where they think everyone in high sec thinks like them, when in fact their views are just fringe idiocy that are unpopular EVEN in high sec.
Memphis Baas
#16 - 2016-01-09 17:56:49 UTC
CCP has to finish the damn null sov revamp and give roles to those capitals; everybody's bored and people are leaving.

High sec is in a pretty good place, ships have been revamped, UI for industry has seen some changes, lots of the standings restrictions have been removed so y'all can POS and PI and whatever.

Finish fixing null, so we can have the big wars again; they attract new players and keep the old interested and playing.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#17 - 2016-01-09 18:07:31 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

The most vocal high sec posters here suffer from that 'truly false consensus' problem where they think everyone in high sec thinks like them, when in fact their views are just fringe idiocy that are unpopular EVEN in high sec.

*cough*
Yourmoney Mywallet
Doomheim
#18 - 2016-01-09 18:24:43 UTC
Who? What?
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#19 - 2016-01-09 18:38:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Benny Ohu
yes we need to start asking the real questions

why haven't we seen any councilors birth certificates
is the csm actually a cover for an extraterrestrial nacho smuggling operation
could the csm voting process be improved with a peacock wrestling bonus round
is there confirmation no csm x members were blood-drinking lizards, and if not, why not
why won't ccp publically acknowledge independant reports csm voting causes rashes

e: why are you voting for that person
Ibutho Inkosi
Doomheim
#20 - 2016-01-09 18:40:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Ibutho Inkosi
This CSM election has a reputation of not being very representative. A vast majority of people seem relatively isolated, or limited in their in-game contacts with one another, so it seems like a large leap of faith that anyone would know anyone who runs, or would be known if running themselves. The reputation EVE's CSM has is it has, as a result, been hijacked and is constantly held by a small percentage of well-organized people, and therefore only represents them and their interests.

I have a problem with endorsing situations such as these. I also have a problem with so-called professional people countenancing such conditions. However, when these so-called professionals are party to exposing their own paying customers to the vagaries of a select few of their paying customers, then things are more than a little strange. This changes the relationship of the company and the customer to one of charlatan and dupe.

It's a black cloud over what otherwise would be a rather positive situation, and also has to be suspect in why things a majority of players seem to clamor for don't seem to be getting any attention at all. Could it be to address such issues runs counter to the wishes of the select few who have hijacked the process? Sadly, in such cases as these, where credibility is breached, one must assume it does.

Thanks for the peppy "lets' all get in there and do something" post. I can see the idealism driving it. Yet, so few players use and read this forum, I doubt it will have the required impact.

As long as the tale of the hunt is told by the hunter, and not the lion, it will favor the hunter.

123Next pageLast page