Jita Park Speakers Corner

See this is what I'm talking about, rhetorical nonsense.

What I described above was NOT a narrow focus of issues. It describes at least 3/4 of the current gameplay as a whole.

Stop smoking the crack dude.

The entire point of an industry focus is the finally start to look at the other 3/4 of the game that isn't about shooting guns at things.

I really can't see how you are "for industry" while pushing forward with some weird plans for WIS. I can assure you of one thing - you won't be able to get CCP to do both. They only have so much manpower as we saw this year as well - one only has to read the CSM minutes to find multiple instances of ideas that were not persued but considered to be good ideas anyhow.

Your inability to speak authoritatively on any of the above subjects shows that while you might know something ABOUT industry, you are still well and truly in the dark when it comes to fomenting change in the game. One thing CSM and CCP has ingrained in many people now are reasonable expectations with regard to what they can/will do in periods of CSM involvement - that's the 12 months I am speaking about. To say nothing of what they are willing to do between financial year book keeping periods.

SURELY you have a reasonable expectation in mind when it comes to how much change you can create in what timeframe?

Playing the game and changing the game are two different things.

You keep babbling about WiS in an industry thread. While I am pro ambulation it is hardly my primary focus for my efforts in the CSM 7. I've made it beyond clear mining is my focus in my CSM 7 efforts. You claim not to be goon associated but you sure have had a heaping share of their "rant about my support for WIS regardless of the topic " koolaide.

So not sure what you hope to accomplish.

On to another point in this thread. I expect I have more direct experience managing development of commercial software projects. Any CSM 7 that is promising major changes in Eve in their term is simple lying. The physics of the development process means if you see it in the next year it was either minor twisting the stat knob balancing stuff or it is in queue now.

What that means is you need to get CCP starting to think about big things (like a major mining revamp) sooner rather than later to have any hope of seeing it in your Eve lifetime. You can go on about agile all you want but in the end as stated in the Mythical Man Month, it takes nine months to birth a baby no matter how many women you assign to the project.

Big things take time. That said, ask yourself this, we have several candidates that claim interesting in industry and mining that were in the CSM even from CSM 4 through the CSM 6. If they were passionate about these things, where after years is any sign of CCP thinking about industry or mining as a priority much less features in game to prove the passion and focus on these areas?

When I was in the CSM 2 we had a big scandal to focus on, and a combat simulator to kill. We did that very well, about the time we were really becoming effective our term was over. In CSM 3 I was "promoted" long after the window of influence was over. So why did these candidates with longer uninterrupted terms, no scandals to handle and multiple face to face Iceland meetings deliver so little for miners and industrialist? Simple answer, those were never really their areas if interest so they never spent any time working with CCP to improve them.

Hope that clears up again, my focus, who I might be and what I stand for if elected.

Issler Dainze
The Miner's Friend
CSM 7 Candidate

I've repeated many time, I am not here to design a feature to the nth level of detail. If elected I'll have an advisory panel of players to collect and refine the best ideas from the player base. Starting with mining. Any candidate presenting detailed ideas, like yourself is already telling the voters that you "already know the answers and will likely focus on your own ideas and not theirs"!

What I bring, eight years in Eve doing most everything at one time or another, past CSM experience, honesty, openness, a commitment to represent the players interest, not my own, extensive software engineering experience that includes game development, freedom from power block influences and more.

Before I was officially a candidate you contacted me directly asking to drop out and support you. Now I seem to have caught you attention, you must think I'm gaining some traction in the election.

So in summary, what you get with me is a candidate who will be driven by the player interests, not my own. My ideas will be poured into the giant pot of great ideas from the players and sorted, discussed and vetted by the players themselves unlike many of the other candidates that already seem to think they know it all.

Issler Dainze
The Miner's Friend
CSM 7 Candidate
The voice of reason for the players of Eve

issler: let us suppose a database error has accidentally placed you on the csm. you have been presented with something ccp is considering. it is under nda.

what do you have to bring to the table besides vacuous nonsense that anyone will pay attention to? consulting the council (who, one presumes, are the actual brains of this operation since you've basically said that) is not an option

You make it hard to do otherwise.

Going to Iceland as part of a CSM meeting is not a plus for me. It is work the entire time you are there and it cost me a non-trivial amount of money to miss billable consulting work.

If I was looking for an Iceland vacation I would plan one around the Fanfest, which I couldn't make this year becaujse of work commitments. The cost of going to Iceland with my own isks isn't an issue for me.

I am doing it because I am committed to Eve and want to help make it better.

Issler Danze
The Miner's Friend
CSM 7 Candidate

Uh, I'm sorry, but that isn't allowed. If CCP comes to you with, say, a plan for ultra-titans with 8 doomsday slots, you can't make a thread on the forums about them.

While I agree that it isn't the role of the CSM to do game design, it *is* the role of the CSM to both point out specifics of what is currently not working as well as to critique the proposals CCP brings to the table (and to do so *on your own* without the support of some sort of "council")

I certainly can have broad discussions about Eve with anyone I want. I've been under CCP NDA multiple times and never violated them (as well as dozens of other NDAs because of my career I am almost always working on something new with major IP).

What I can use advisers for is my original intention. Work on ideas do I want to champion.

My point is I am not as many candidates seem to think, the ultimate "good idea fairy" of Eve. So I haven't wasted a lot of peoples times with 20 pages of exactly how I want Eve because it isn't my call and by the time CCP is done with it any idea will evolve using their game development experience to be likely different that what is proposed.

Issler Dainze
The Miner's Friend
CSM 7 Candidate

I see the problem here now. Clearly you just haven't taken the time to read my material. If you had, you'd already know that many of the detailed ideas I included in my platform were taken straight from the community and not purely my own imagination. My campaign platform contained an explicit message to the voters regarding my commitment to be a listener, one I've repeated clearly and consistently throughout the election and demonstrated historically with my actions.

Effective CSM members need to be able to keep a level head and get to know a person or issue thoroughly and refrain from making knee-jerk responses. Please, please get to know the other candidates before making accusations like this, its makes you look overtly hostile whether you mean to be or not.



With a few exceptions here, these are a generic list of characteristics that ALL effective CSM members should demonstrate. CSM member doing their jobs well are going to be honest, open, committed to representing the players, and must stay free from caving to special interest groups at the expensive of the greater good. These are not the things that make YOU, Issler Dainze, special. I've been playing for almost three years. You've been playing for 8. You should be explaining to the voters what exactly it is that those extra five years have taught you about the game, that I might not understand. Don't be afraid to be yourself and talk about whats important to you!



I strongly caution you not to get too comfortable and assume that because someone is giving you "attention" it should be taken as a sign of success. I've tried to explain this regarding the Goon attacks infesting your campaign thread - it is important you understand that the Goons have no history of concentrating on the strongest candidates.

The problem with simply smiling and saying "Goons hate me. Success!" is that if the Goons are asking legitimate questions that voters deserve to know, you do the VOTERS the disservice by simply refusing to engage. Responding confidently and thoroughly to important questions, even if they come from trolls, shows maturity and resilience.

Listening to players, moderating disussions, compiling ideas, and sifting through bad suggestions is tedious work - but you don't need a board of advisors to do it for you. In fact, you don't even have to be elected to the CSM to roll up your sleeves and get to work. This is what I've been trying to prove with my work over the last 6 months, and much has been accomplished in terms of informing CCP as to the players wishes for Faction Warfare, and I'm very excited to see the results this summer whether or not I get elected to the councii.

Most importantly, you do understand that the CSM is an advisory council itself, right? I wouldn't keep advertising your plans to rely on advisors if I were you, voters are going to struggle with the idea of an advisor relying on other advisors to get the work done. It also leaves you wide open to becoming the star of the next "Yo Dawg" meme. Somewhere there's a Goon already working on this, its just a matter of time before we see it posted somewhere.



Well, at least you are willing to admit that are ideas you want to champion, even if you are still going to use advisors to advise you on how to advise CCP about the ideas you like. Earlier though, you accused me of only championing my own ideas instead of those of the players.

Lets just drop the pretense that personal passions shouldn't play into what each CSM member contributes during their term, ultimately every CSM member SHOULD care deeply about enough things in the game to be willing to put the work in to see that they get fixed. We both know that CSM members should care, and we both know that CSM members should listen to players as well, so this isn't worth arguing about. You need to be getting out more to the voters right now about just what it is you care about, and find a way to truly demonstrate how hard you're willing to work yourself at the job.



Now this is just rude and uncalled for. Those 20 pages contained a great deal of PLAYER ideas, sources cited, and contained a list of acknowledgements for those that contributed to its creation. It was a community project as much as it was any kind of personal manifesto, and I literally said this in a disclaimer on the first content page. To say it wasted peoples time is to disrespect the 34 pages of mostly thoughtful discussion that followed after its release, and it disrespects the hundreds of voters specifically referencing my platform document as the reason they decided to support me with their votes.



Again, if you'd read even the first page of my platform document you'd see I said almost the exact same sentence.

This is why I've said just work on being YOU, Issler Dainze, and you'll earn more votes. It's never too late to share with the voters what makes you unique, instead of repeatedly defending yourself by saying you'll do all the same things for them that the rest of us will too. Part of the fun in this campaign has been getting to know all other candidates and learning about what they enjoy and what they're passionate about. I asked these question not to attack but to honestly learn more about you, because up to this point you've insisted on holding your cards close to your chest and speaking about the issues as broadly as possible.