These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Okay, CCP, why don't you just come out and campaign for your candidate for CSM7?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vyl Vit
#21 - 2012-03-03 01:13:33 UTC
Tippia wrote:
yadda yadda yadda yadda

Yeah. Right.

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#22 - 2012-03-03 01:16:03 UTC
Vyl Vit wrote:
Yeah. Right.
So you agree with me, then, and will stop whinging.
Good.
Serene Repose
#23 - 2012-03-03 01:19:37 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Vyl Vit wrote:
Yeah. Right.
So you agree with me, then, and will stop whinging.
Good.


It's so not like you to accuse someone of whining when they clearly aren't.

I find it hard to believe anyone would disagree with this OP. Maybe we deserve to be hurled back into the feudal age.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#24 - 2012-03-03 01:34:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Serene Repose wrote:
It's so not like you to accuse someone of whining when they clearly aren't.
He's whinging about how CCP favours two candidates over all others, when there is quite literally nothing to suggest that they do.

They are publishing a snippet about a player event connected to the very current process of the CSM election. Is this favouritism? No, because other, similar items have been published in the past, and it is kind of the whole point with that particular news feed. This event features two candidates — are they favoured? We don't know, because we don't know if any other such debates are coming; we do not know if others were approached for this broadcast; if they were, we don't know what they answered; we have no context for this one broadcast.

I accuse him of whinging because the problem he sees is one that is entirely created in his own mind.

Quote:
I find it hard to believe anyone would disagree with this OP.
I disagree with him for the same reason I almost always disagree with people: because his complaint has pretty much zero foundation, but rather rests on a chain on assumptions that, each and one on their own, are rather tin-foil:y and improbable.


CCP is raising awareness of the CSM election as an attempt to stave of the inevitable complaint that no-one knows about/cares about/engages in the CSM. Why on earth is the OP so upset about this?
Vyl Vit
#25 - 2012-03-03 01:37:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Vyl Vit
Tippia wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:
It's so not like you to accuse someone of whining when they clearly aren't.
He's whinging about how CCP favours two candidates over all others, when there is quite literally nothing to suggest that they do.

They are publishing a snippet about a player event connected to the very current process of the CSM election. Is this favouritism? No, because other, similar items have been published in the past, and it is kind of the whole point with that particular news feed. This event features two candidates — are they favoured? We don't know, because we don't know if any other such debates are coming; we do not know if others were approached for this broadcast; if they were, we don't know what they answered; we have no context for this one broadcast.

I accuse him of whinging because the problem he sees is one that is entirely created in his own mind.

Quote:
I find it hard to believe anyone would disagree with this OP.
I disagree with him for the same reason I almost always disagree with people: because his complaint has pretty much zero foundation, but rather rests on a chain on assumptions that, each and one on their own, are rather tin-foil:y and improbable.


CCP is raising awareness of the CSM election as an attempt to stave of the inevitable complaint that no-one knows about/cares about/engages in the CSM. Why on earth is the OP so upset about this?

Pointing something out isn't whining, however 733T you are in your speak.

Oh, I get it. Paint someone with the "whining brush" and they don't have to be taken seriously. Now. Where have I seen this before?

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#26 - 2012-03-03 01:45:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Vyl Vit wrote:
Pointing something out isn't whining, however 733T you are in your speak.
The problem is, you're not pointing anything out — you're making far-reaching assertions derived from near-paranoid assumptions about the meaning of a completely ordinary event.

Pointing something out would be to say that the event CCP highlights has a risk of being one-sided. You're not doing that — you're essentially accusing CCP and EVE Radio of being partisan without anything to really back it up.
Quote:
Oh, I get it. Paint someone with the "whining brush" and they don't have to be taken seriously.
Wrong way around: the reason I paint you with the whinging brush is because your chain of reasoning cannot be taken seriously.
Valentyn3
Deep Core Mining Inc.
#27 - 2012-03-03 01:49:46 UTC
Vyl Vit wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Riverini is a CCP stooge?
No. Just a stooge. Curly, I think.


Curly Stooge best Stooge.

I don't always use hax. But when I do, it's because I'm an NPC.. http://i.imgur.com/PUZou.jpg
Vyl Vit
#28 - 2012-03-03 01:53:27 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Vyl Vit wrote:
Pointing something out isn't whining, however 733T you are in your speak.
The problem is, you're not pointing anything out — you're making far-reaching assertions derived from near-paranoid assumptions about the meaning of a completely ordinary event.

Pointing something out would be to say that the event CCP highlights has a risk of being one-sided. You're not doing that — you're essentially accusing CCP and EVE Radio of being partisan without anything to really back it up.
Quote:
Oh, I get it. Paint someone with the "whining brush" and they don't have to be taken seriously.
Wrong way around: the reason I paint you with the whinging brush is because your chain of reasoning cannot be taken seriously.

If you say so? Whatever. Tell you what, Tippia. Don't take it seriously. I'll bet there's a dozen posts on the index page to which you can lend your intellectual powers. Enjoy.

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.
QGazQ
#29 - 2012-03-03 01:56:19 UTC
Just a quick reply,

Funkybacon managed to organise a discussion for his show featuring Mittani and Riverini, told MrBlades about it and he decided it was something worth promoting and asked CCP if they could give it some press.

Key point being we (EVE Radio) approached CCP about publicising it and if we hadnt they wouldnt have posted a news item about it because they wouldnt have known.

We had a show, we figured it would be of interest to people, we asked ccp if they would mention it like they do with other events going on.

If any other candidates want to have a go, get in touch with us and we'll see about giving them a voice.

And a last comment:
<&MrBlades> Oh and we think goons are terrible people

Regards
QGazQ
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#30 - 2012-03-03 01:59:00 UTC
Vyl Vit wrote:
If you say so? Whatever. Tell you what, Tippia. Don't take it seriously.
Since you continue to not provide much in the way of evidence for your assertions, I will continue to say that your reasoning can't be considered serious.
Vyl Vit
#31 - 2012-03-03 02:02:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Vyl Vit
QGazQ wrote:
Just a quick reply,

Funkybacon managed to organise a discussion for his show featuring Mittani and Riverini, told MrBlades about it and he decided it was something worth promoting and asked CCP if they could give it some press.

Key point being we (EVE Radio) approached CCP about publicising it and if we hadnt they wouldnt have posted a news item about it because they wouldnt have known.

We had a show, we figured it would be of interest to people, we asked ccp if they would mention it like they do with other events going on.

If any other candidates want to have a go, get in touch with us and we'll see about giving them a voice.

And a last comment:
<&MrBlades> Oh and we think goons are terrible people

Regards
QGazQ

Granted. More power to you. Since this is an election sanctioned (devised) by CCP for player representation to influence the development of the game, CCP has a responsibility to conduct itself differently than say you would. You're free to do whatever. CCP can't be seen as preferring or giving the impression of endorsing any of the candidates. That's part of the deal they themselves invented.

Therefore, if they were to give you press, it would be AFTER the event in the form of a standard news story, AND they'd further have to contact the candidates who weren't present to get their views about a.) not being invited and b.) the validity of what the candidates who WERE invited had to say.

I don't know how I can make this more plain. Were this sort of thing to happen in a credible journalism venue, heads would roll and people would be fired...on CCP's side, not yours.

You have the right to involve yourself in all this however you wish, but you also must consider (or not) your credibility and integrity are involved as well. These may not mean anything to you. That's your right.

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#32 - 2012-03-03 02:13:34 UTC
Vyl Vit wrote:
CCP can't be seen as preferring or giving the impression of endorsing any of the candidates. That's part of the deal they themselves invented.
Good thing they're not doing that, then.

Quote:
Therefore, if they were to give you press, it would be AFTER the event in the form of a standard news story, AND they'd further have to contact the candidates who weren't present to get their views about a.) not being invited and b.) the validity of what the candidates who WERE invited had to say.
Why is any of that CCP's obligation? They're not journalists and they're not giving anyone “press” — they're (again) simply raising awareness of player events related to the CSM election, hopefully raising awareness of the election itself in the process.

You'd have a point of other venues were trying to provide those other voices and were being denied the same kind of awareness, but what do you have that suggest that anything of the sort is going on?
Pok Nibin
Doomheim
#33 - 2012-03-03 02:15:00 UTC
Looks to me, Mistah Vyt, your approach in conveying these observations includes an assumption you're talking to a community that has a basic understanding of democratic process. It is evident by many of these "intelligent" responses, you've made a false assumption. I can see where you made your mistake, in that all these people are supposed to be living in democracies. The big HOWEVER there is, dysfunctional democracies all - peopled by the apathetic and ignorant in the main.

All that aside. Point well taken.

The right to free speech doesn't automatically carry with it the right to be taken seriously.
Basileus Volkan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#34 - 2012-03-03 02:15:45 UTC
The debate so far has been a blast.
Serene Repose
#35 - 2012-03-03 02:32:24 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Vyl Vit wrote:
CCP can't be seen as preferring or giving the impression of endorsing any of the candidates. That's part of the deal they themselves invented.
Good thing they're not doing that, then.

Quote:
Therefore, if they were to give you press, it would be AFTER the event in the form of a standard news story, AND they'd further have to contact the candidates who weren't present to get their views about a.) not being invited and b.) the validity of what the candidates who WERE invited had to say.
Why is any of that CCP's obligation? They're not journalists and they're not giving anyone “press” — they're (again) simply raising awareness of player events related to the CSM election, hopefully raising awareness of the election itself in the process.

You'd have a point of other venues were trying to provide those other voices and were being denied the same kind of awareness, but what do you have that suggest that anything of the sort is going on?

I'm sorry, but you seem to have missed the point of the OP entirely. Your first mistake was to assume he's complaining, or whining as you say. Your second mistake was to apply EVE reasoning to this more philosophical and nuanced point. All of your questions bespeak of someone who has scant understanding of the mechanisms of a free, democratic society.

To answer the "issues" you raise, is to repeat the curriculum of a high school civics class. Oh yeah. They don't teach civics anymore. More's the pity. I don't see how the OP is obliged to field your foray into the tangental.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.
Johnny Marzetti
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#36 - 2012-03-03 02:33:14 UTC
Now that it's over how could you have wanted it to be any other way? More candidates would have reduced Riverini's portion of airtime and that would have been tragic.
Vyl Vit
#37 - 2012-03-03 02:33:52 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Vyl Vit wrote:
CCP can't be seen as preferring or giving the impression of endorsing any of the candidates. That's part of the deal they themselves invented.
Good thing they're not doing that, then.

Quote:
Therefore, if they were to give you press, it would be AFTER the event in the form of a standard news story, AND they'd further have to contact the candidates who weren't present to get their views about a.) not being invited and b.) the validity of what the candidates who WERE invited had to say.
Why is any of that CCP's obligation? They're not journalists and they're not giving anyone “press” — they're (again) simply raising awareness of player events related to the CSM election, hopefully raising awareness of the election itself in the process.

You'd have a point of other venues were trying to provide those other voices and were being denied the same kind of awareness, but what do you have that suggest that anything of the sort is going on?

I'm sorry, but you seem to have missed the point of the OP entirely. Your first mistake was to assume he's complaining, or whining as you say. Your second mistake was to apply EVE reasoning to this more philosophical and nuanced point. All of your questions bespeak of someone who has scant understanding of the mechanisms of a free, democratic society.

To answer the "issues" you raise, is to repeat the curriculum of a high school civics class. Oh yeah. They don't teach civics anymore. More's the pity. I don't see how the OP is obliged to field your foray into the tangental.

Thank-you very much, and that's something I refuse to do.

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.
DJ Xaphod
Eve Radio Corporation
#38 - 2012-03-03 02:46:34 UTC
Vyl Vit wrote:
the greater point is - what about the other candidates?


You might have a point, though I will point out that I'm an ER DJ and not a single CSM candidate has ever said two words to me. You'd think if people desired exposure they'd go out looking for it, but there we go.

Funky decided that for his show a debate would be the best format, which is one way of doing things - it works great when you have two candidates.. but yeah, if there are several candidates what do you do...?

Well, you do a roundtable type thing, I guess.

So I am doing, on my show this Sunday.

Evemail me if you want to participate; I particularly want to hear from some of those CSM hopefuls who possibly haven't made their voices heard.

≡>≡ Radio, Bringing Music to the Masses. http://eve-radio.com I play Rock & Metal Monday Nights 2200 GameTime
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#39 - 2012-03-03 02:53:32 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
I'm sorry, but you seem to have missed the point of the OP entirely. Your first mistake was to assume he's complaining, or whining as you say.
…you mean such as denouncing the publishing of a quick blurb about an upcoming debate as “[making] the face farcical”? Yeah, no, I think that qualifies as complaining quite nicely.

Quote:
Your second mistake was to apply EVE reasoning to this more philosophical and nuanced point. All of your questions bespeak of someone who has scant understanding of the mechanisms of a free, democratic society.
…which have pretty much nothing to do with CCP raising awareness of a player-run event. I know quite a lot about the mechanisms you speak of — hell, I teach them. As such, I can tell you that they're not particularly applicable here.

I'm not applying “EVE reasoning” — I'm applying reason, plain and simple.

The problem is that the OP thinks there is some journalistic obligation or fairness doctrine just because it's called a “news feed”, when in reality, it's just a list of highlights about what is going on in and around EVE. CCP is “endorsing” EVE radio for the simple reason that it's about EVE and about the CSM (and “endorsing” is far too loaded a word for what they're doing). CCP has no responsibility to balance out what EVE radio does beyond offering the same kind of highlighting to other player-run events that do the same thing. In fact, they already offer the platform for those other candidates to make themselves heard.

Claiming that they are endorsing any specific candidate just because they insert this highlight is beyond silly. Should they also include news (and commentary) about WoT patches to keep it fair and balanced?

Come back when EVE radio (or anyone else) is being denied a spot in the news feed because they're offering a platform for some other set of candidates or when EVE radio (in the presumed role of having privileged access to getting on the news feed) starts denying candidates access to the same (in this case unique) platform.
Pok Nibin
Doomheim
#40 - 2012-03-03 04:14:33 UTC
Tippia wrote:
...you mean such as denouncing the publishing of a quick blurb about an upcoming debate as “[making] the fa[r]ce farcical”? Yeah, no, I think that qualifies as complaining quite nicely.
Firstly, "denounce" isn't an accurate characterization. "Ridicule" may be more apt. But, if you admit that, then your assertion he's whining falls on its butt, which is where it belongs, btw.
Tippia wrote:

which have pretty much nothing to do with CCP raising awareness of a player-run event. I know quite a lot about the mechanisms you speak of — hell, I teach them. As such, I can tell you that they're not particularly applicable here.
I love how you use "player-run event" here. The election seems to have disappeared off the screen! Nice magic trick. Denouncements/conspiracies...and if you teach them you're either being disingenous, or need to find work you're more competent with.



Tippia wrote:

I'm not applying “EVE reasoning” — I'm applying reason, plain and simple.

The problem is that the OP thinks there is some journalistic obligation or fairness doctrine just because it's called a “news feed”, when in reality, it's just a list of highlights about what is going on in and around EVE. CCP is “endorsing” EVE radio for the simple reason that it's about EVE and about the CSM (and “endorsing” is far too loaded a word for what they're doing). CCP has no responsibility to balance out what EVE radio does beyond offering the same kind of highlighting to other player-run events that do the same thing. In fact, they already offer the platform for those other candidates to make themselves heard.
I love how your block quotes create the illusion of thoroughness. I also like the way you leave out certain things..the OP never said CCP has a journalistic responsibility. But, you're so all over the map at this point...
Tippia wrote:

Claiming that they are endorsing any specific candidate just because they insert this highlight is beyond silly. Should they also include news (and commentary) about WoT patches to keep it fair and balanced?
I know, you've never heard of "the appearance of," or "by inference."
Tippia wrote:

Come back when EVE radio (or anyone else) is being denied a spot in the news feed because they're offering a platform for some other set of candidates or when EVE radio (in the presumed role of having privileged access to getting on the news feed) starts denying candidates access to the same (in this case unique) platform.

"Come back when..."? Well, la dee dah. Ain't we special. Go from a slipshod use of facts, insertions of inferences not based in fact, to giving personal commands? See it Tippia's way or go away? I think that says it all.


The right to free speech doesn't automatically carry with it the right to be taken seriously.