These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

There will never be a CSM representative for highsec..

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lharanai
Fools of the Blue Oyster
#41 - 2012-01-27 08:13:03 UTC
Zirse wrote:
met worst wrote:
Thorn Galen wrote:
Mr M wrote:
There's been highsec delegates, not impossible that there will be new ones. But that wont happen as long as people don't care to vote.


There it is, that's all true.

It's not a problem about a shortage of suitable delegates, it's a problem of the apathy of most Highsec dwellers who simply remain ignorant about the entire CSM process. Or, knowing about the process, are simply are not bothered to vote as an odd, self-defeating form of "protest" on their part. This makes them think that in this way, they are then allowed to spew crap at a later date when they see things happening which they do not agree with. Then they blame the CSM for all their sorrows and woes, and "who voted for you anyway?" and "Highsec does not have a chance" and so on.

The candidates are there.

Vote - and have at least some modicum of inner peace knowing that when you have a gripe about something going-on in or with this game, you can at least voice your concern from a position of having being a participant.

Don't Vote - and have at least a modicum of decency to stop complaining like an unpaid hooker, knowing that you could not give a crap about ensuring that someone who was at least somewhat representing some of your interests and concerns, was not in the CSM - because of your little "non-contribution".

A load of drivel. It's not all apathy, it's not a lack of understanding, it's frustration at a ****** system.

People can't be bothered because it DOES NOT represent them properly. The sandbox in Eve ensures neccessity for large 0.0 alliance blocs (they HAVE to be big to survive). Highsec does NOT have the need to "survive" and it negates the neccessity for highsec to form up.

The CSM system fails at the fundamental level because it does NOT address that single intrinsic imbalance.


The only election null has ever controlled was the last one. Are you implying that highseccers everywhere have given up after one election? Or that they gave up even before the outcome of the last one was assured? (I do recall a somewhat serious 'save the csm' campaign being run by mynxee or something similar.)

Highsec has the ability to be very well represented in the CSM they just lack the will or the desire to get it done.



BECAUSE ITS A GAME

Sorry to inform you that for some people EVE is not the center of their life, just a product they pay for. But I have to agree with former posters....WHO DOES NOT VOTE HAS NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN

Seriously, don't take me serious, I MEAN IT...seriously
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#42 - 2012-01-27 08:17:44 UTC
Lharanai wrote:


BECAUSE ITS A GAME

Sorry to inform you that for some people EVE is not the center of their life, just a product they pay for. But I have to agree with former posters....WHO DOES NOT VOTE HAS NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN


That something is a game does not make it invalid to become invested in it. Just like people who run bowling leagues, or organize adult sports teams, or coach kids baseball. We do it because it's an enjoyable hobby, and we become invested because we want out hobby to remain available to us and continue to improve for us.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Implying Implications
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#43 - 2012-01-27 08:23:01 UTC
Highsec dwellers are a bunch of retards that shouldn't even be allowed to vote.

hello
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#44 - 2012-01-27 08:24:03 UTC
Implying Implications wrote:
Highsec dwellers are a bunch of retards that shouldn't even be allowed to vote.


This kind of attitude annoys me just as much.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#45 - 2012-01-27 08:27:21 UTC
Implying Implications wrote:
Highsec dwellers are a bunch of retards that shouldn't even be allowed to vote.


Now you are hurting my feelings.

Is this how you thank me for supplying you guys with juicy killmails since 2007? Cry

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
Darius III
Interstellar eXodus
The Initiative.
#46 - 2012-01-27 08:35:51 UTC
Maybe you missing out on your options mate.

I spend the majority of my time in hisec. You cant be a suicide ganker, by definition, anywhere else.

Also I run incursions sometimes. People say that Brick is a "large 0.0 alliance" We have @ 500 people and live mostly in lowsec. Fact is you already have a hisec CSM. I got a LOT of votes from Hisec last election, and those votes got me in. Viva La Hisec, yo

Hmmm
Tore Vest
#47 - 2012-01-27 08:43:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Tore Vest
Darius III wrote:
I got a LOT of votes from Hisec last election, and those votes got me in.

Well...
Lesson learned Bear

Dot think that happens again....

No troll.
Aineko Macx
#48 - 2012-01-27 09:06:24 UTC
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#49 - 2012-01-27 09:12:26 UTC
Tres Farmer wrote:
Because people who play in high sec and who aren't alts of any other group aren't as passionate about the game.
And being passionate about the game is needed to become a CSM representative.. it's additional stress and work besides playing this game, which even after you did it to the best of your knowledge and ability in 90% of the cases earns you mockery and verbal abuse. For people who are just playing casually this is not feasible.
So the only ones, who rally for CSM and take the downsides are those who get something out of it for their group.

It's funny though.. a very large group, composed of casual players has no voice because of the nature of it's members. Cool



Like you know this Ugh

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#50 - 2012-01-27 09:18:08 UTC
met worst wrote:
People can't be bothered because it DOES NOT represent them properly.
The reason it does not represent them properly is because they can't be bothered to vote.
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2012-01-27 09:40:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Vera Algaert
Just look at the frontpage of this board to see why high-sec struggles to elect their "own" CSM reps.

You can't even agree on one thread to discuss the problem in.

Instead you allow the discussion split among multiple threads and also give high visibility to "boycott the elections" and "get rid off CSM" threads.

That being said, it has already been mentioned that there will be an EVE Uni candidate and I would be really surprised if there won't be a BTL/TDF candidate to leverage all the incursion outrage.

I think both would have a realistic chance of getting elected if they play their cards right (and actually manage to consolidate the debate).

Boycotting the vote won't impress CCP (the CSM is a very valuable marketing tool, every election time there are great articles about player democracy - just see the recent "the oldest republic" interview; CCP won't give up on this no matter how low participation should drop) and only hurts your own interests.
Your number one priority should be to silence the "get rid off CSM" and "boycott the CSM" detractors.

You may associate the term "united front" with Stalinist oppression but it would do your prospective leaders good to read up on the theory and history behind it.
The biggest danger to any change are not your enemies but the "allies" who just don't quite share your opinion. They compete with you for members and mindshare, they slow you down with pointless debates and integrating them into a united front is the only way to make your voice heard and reach the critical mass necessary to effect change.

.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#52 - 2012-01-27 09:48:09 UTC
A good portion of High Sec are alts of people that play elsewhere. Unlike Sov Null those that spend most of their time in High Sec don't have common interests, in fact many are diametrically opposed. Everyone in EVE knows the workings of High Sec space very well, but those that only stay in High Sec are often ignorant of Null, WH, and even Low Sec space, making them a poor choice of candidate.

I think despite their relatively small numbers Wormholers and Faction War players have a much better chance of getting good representation than any "High Sec candidate" that simply can't feasibly represent such a large diverse group of players.
Grumpy Owly
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#53 - 2012-01-27 10:24:02 UTC
Xorv wrote:
A good portion of High Sec are alts of people that play elsewhere. Unlike Sov Null those that spend most of their time in High Sec don't have common interests, in fact many are diametrically opposed. Everyone in EVE knows the workings of High Sec space very well, but those that only stay in High Sec are often ignorant of Null, WH, and even Low Sec space, making them a poor choice of candidate.

I think despite their relatively small numbers Wormholers and Faction War players have a much better chance of getting good representation than any "High Sec candidate" that simply can't feasibly represent such a large diverse group of players.


I'd like to know more in detail about this discriminating and provoking statement that null and high sec are diametrically opposed. Why can't certian aspects of regional areas work together if they wish?

Despite certain groups in null taking certain obvious griefing efforts in an ongoing war against the area, my interpretable view is that the majority of null sec in fact are only bothered about that free space and use HS and other areas as a market opportunity for some commercial interests. But their main interest is in Sov "building" and its defence.

I just don't want to see a missunderstood animosity being fueled purely on the basis of a minority handful of null sec alliances causing some "hic-ups" for High sec.

Bounty Hunting - Soon (™): Retribution (Winter 2012)

It's just criminal - Smuggling
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#54 - 2012-01-27 11:04:19 UTC
Grumpy Owly wrote:

I'd like to know more in detail about this discriminating and provoking statement that null and high sec are diametrically opposed. Why can't certian aspects of regional areas work together if they wish?


That wasn't what I said. I said that High Sec residence themselves have diametrically opposed interests, unlike Sov Nullsec which have mostly common interests. This in relation to game development and issues.

You talk about Sov Nullsec groups coming and "griefing" High Sec, but to me that makes little sense. Most of Nullsec also has Highsec alts. The most well known groups that have terms like "griefing" labeled to them, like Privateers, Orphange, TEARS etc are all High Sec groups, not Null, only Goons really stand out as a Null based group in that category.
Lady Spank
Get Out Nasty Face
#55 - 2012-01-27 11:10:31 UTC
I always preferred the sea at night, cold sand between my toes and the stars above, mercurial, timeless.

The ebb and flow of my existence laid bare.

(ಠ_ృ) ~ It Takes a Million Years to Become Diamonds So Lets Just Burn Like Coal Until the Sky's Black ~ (ಠ_ృ)
Grumpy Owly
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#56 - 2012-01-27 11:21:07 UTC
Xorv wrote:
Grumpy Owly wrote:

I'd like to know more in detail about this discriminating and provoking statement that null and high sec are diametrically opposed. Why can't certian aspects of regional areas work together if they wish?


That wasn't what I said. I said that High Sec residence themselves have diametrically opposed interests, unlike Sov Nullsec which have mostly common interests. This in relation to game development and issues.

You talk about Sov Nullsec groups coming and "griefing" High Sec, but to me that makes little sense. Most of Nullsec also has Highsec alts. The most well known groups that have terms like "griefing" labeled to them, like Privateers, Orphange, TEARS etc are all High Sec groups, not Null, only Goons really stand out as a Null based group in that category.


Understood. Thanks for clarifying.

Bounty Hunting - Soon (™): Retribution (Winter 2012)

It's just criminal - Smuggling
Kelduum Revaan
The Ebon Hawk
#57 - 2012-01-27 11:33:27 UTC
Tres Farmer wrote:
Because people who play in high sec and who aren't alts of any other group aren't as passionate about the game.
And being passionate about the game is needed to become a CSM representative..


I wouldn't say that, I know some very passionate people who base themselves in hisec, not including myself, and as mentioned elsewhere, I'll be running for CSM7.

Tres Farmer wrote:
It's funny though.. a very large group, composed of casual players has no voice because of the nature of it's members. [:8)
Again, not quite true, as E-UNI proved in the CSM croud-sourcing last year.

As mentioned above, the problem is that there are very many voices in 'hisec', but very few large groups or coalitions as the situation does not demand it, so the votes get fragmented.
Cannibal Kane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#58 - 2012-01-27 11:42:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Cannibal Kane
Kelduum Revaan wrote:
Tres Farmer wrote:
Because people who play in high sec and who aren't alts of any other group aren't as passionate about the game.
And being passionate about the game is needed to become a CSM representative..


I wouldn't say that, I know some very passionate people who base themselves in hisec, not including myself, and as mentioned elsewhere, I'll be running for CSM7.

Tres Farmer wrote:
It's funny though.. a very large group, composed of casual players has no voice because of the nature of it's members. [:8)
Again, not quite true, as E-UNI proved in the CSM croud-sourcing last year.

As mentioned above, the problem is that there are very many voices in 'hisec', but very few large groups or coalitions as the situation does not demand it, so the votes get fragmented.



And you will get in due to the voting power of all your members. You guys do certain things well for New EVE players.

But I see you as doing more damage than good, especially in high sec.

"Kane is the End Boss of Highsec." -Psychotic Monk
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2012-01-27 11:45:32 UTC
Tres Farmer wrote:
Because people who play in high sec and who aren't alts of any other group aren't as passionate about the game.
And being passionate about the game is needed to become a CSM representative.. it's additional stress and work besides playing this game, which even after you did it to the best of your knowledge and ability in 90% of the cases earns you mockery and verbal abuse. For people who are just playing casually this is not feasible.
So the only ones, who rally for CSM and take the downsides are those who get something out of it for their group.

It's funny though.. a very large group, composed of casual players has no voice because of the nature of it's members. Cool



Actually, I would argue that many highsec dwellers are passionate about the game. I've met many. Lack of representation of highsec is not due to the populations habits as much as it is to do with the lack of resources and cohesion.

But, even if highsec did have solidarity, how long do you believe it would be before nullsec starts buying votes with their moongoo?

It's all rather pointless to even consider the issue with highsec representation until CCP makes a more formal organization of it and its execution. Until then participation by highsec members is wasted effort as they could never control the amount of wealth that nullsec does. Any cooperative effort by highsec to pool resources to do so will only result in mass scamming.

Don't ban me, bro!
Falaricae
Proffessional Experts Group
#60 - 2012-01-27 11:53:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Falaricae
Actually as a mostly highsec dweller the reason why I haven't voted for highsec representative is simply, that their ideas and vision in general tend to be horrible and I don't want to see them being implemented. I'm not a fan of the 0.0 focus of most representatives either, but they're still much better choices than voting for a pure highsec candidate. Find a candidate who has a main focus on highsec issues, who isn't an inbred baboon and has a clear vision for a sandbox highsec, and he'll have my ax.. I mean vote.