EVE Search - One step further for democracy in EVE

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

One step further for democracy in EVE - CSM Dev Blog by Xhagen

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page
Author	Topic
Poreuomai Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2008.04.21 13:56:00 - [151] Originally by: zoolkhan I am your alternative. Good to see you on the list. You seem to be missing from several unofficial lists, not sure why.
Hamfast Gallente	Posted - 2008.04.21 16:16:00 - [152] CCP Xhagen, You need to find a translator for those CSM candidates that seem not to be able to post in English on these forums... as well as translating posts and opinions from this forum those forums that cater to those customers that speak other languages. As I remember you said that CCP would make sure the CSM could communicate, it's time to show us you can. --------*****-------- Learn and be informed, because a Politicians worst nightmare is an informed voter... So choose your CSM Candidates wisely

CCP Xhagen	Posted - 2008.04.21 16:59:00 - [153] Originally by: Hamfast CCP Xhagen, You need to find a translator for those CSM candidates that seem not to be able to post in English on these forums... as well as translating posts and opinions from this forum those forums that cater to those customers that speak other languages. As I remember you said that CCP would make sure the CSM could communicate, it's time to show us you can. And I still stand by that. I did however double check the candidate list and all of those who are from non-English speaking country list their English knowledge as being either 'Fair' or 'Good'. But should a candidate need any assistance, please reply to the confirmation email received and I will get right back to you. ____________________________ EVE Online CCP Games

Breha Organa	Posted - 2008.04.21 17:34:00 - [154] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Only 3 females? Noone else truly independant, as in not belonging to some powerhungry corp? Looks like I have the home-field advantage! 100% Female 100% Independant 100% Dedicated to YOU! sexy pose home-field advantage, eh? I see your 100%s and ADD to the list my qualifications in real life. I don't have to make a sexy pose, my actions speak for themselves.
Hamfast Gallente	Posted - 2008.04.21 17:50:00 - [155] Originally by: CCP Xhagen Originally by: Hamfast CCP Xhagen, You need to find a translator for those CSM candidates that seem not to be able to post in English on these forums... as well as translating posts and opinions from this forum those forums that cater to those customers that speak other languages. As I remember you said that CCP would make sure the CSM could communicate, it's time to show us you can. And I still stand by that. I did however double check the candidate list and all of those who are from non-English speaking country list their English knowledge as being either 'Fair' or 'Good'. But should a candidate need any assistance, please reply to the confirmation email received and I will get right back to you. My apologies, I went back and looked again and it looks like half the people that do not have a post on your list are in fact English speakers. My first glance at the list I saw that Azzazell, Technomagg and ork chief were all from non-English speaking countries and had nothing posted... I assumed it was a language problem. --------*****-------- Learn and be informed, because a Politicians worst nightmare is an informed voter... So choose your CSM Candidates wisely
Lysander Kaldenn	Posted - 2008.04.21 18:03:00 - [156] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Only 3 females? Noone else truly independant, as in not belonging to some powerhungry corp? Looks like I have the home-field advantage! 100% Female 100% Independant 100% Dedicated to YOU! sexy pose I hope you people realise that this person is questing for pvp flagging and a loss insurance for suicide gankers. I spoke at length with her in local. If you want to destroy EvE by all means listen to her. Take Care is basically a Make EvE WoW movement. Soon we will all be flying our Hacs back from the graveyard while these "independent" 4 year noob-corpers run their missions in the blessed safety of high sec. Her description says nothing about Take Care's motives. How can people who don't participate in the majority of the game (not even joining a corp, for god's sake) have a say in EvE's direction? EvE is not a single player game, it never will be. If you'd like it to be, by all means track down Elite or Privateer, or failing those Freelancer. I can only hope that having Goons on the council will protect pvp and keep this pvp flag garbage of the servers. Also (at least I hope) CCP will probably veto anything that mindless.
Hamfast Gallente	Posted - 2008.04.21 18:12:00 - [157] Originally by: Lysander Kaldenn Edited by: Lysander Kaldenn on 21/04/2008 18:05:39 Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Only 3 females? Noone else truly independant, as in not belonging to some powerhungry corp? Looks like I have the home-field advantage! 100% Female 100% Independant 100% Dedicated to YOU! sexy pose I hope you people realise that this person is questing for pvp flagging (mutual pvp) and a loss insurance for suicide gankers. I spoke at length with her in local. If you want to destroy EvE by all means listen to her. Take Care is basically a Make EvE WoW movement. Soon we will all be flying our Hacs back from the graveyard while these "independent" 4 year noob-corpers run their missions in the blessed safety of high sec. Her description says nothing about Take Care's motives. How can people who don't participate in the majority of the game (not even joining a corp, for god's sake) have a say in EvE's direction? EvE is not a single player game, it never will be. If you'd like it to be, by all means track down Elite or Privateer, or failing those Freelancer. I can only hope that having Goons on the council will protect pvp and keep this pvp flag garbage of the servers. Also (at least I hope) CCP will probably veto anything that mindless. And if enough of us agree with her, she will be elected... nothing says she will be able to get any of her issues changed by CCP, but they will be voiced and answered (I hope)... As for your Chicken Little "The Sky is falling" fear, you have no faith in CCP if you think they will turn this into WoE (World of Evecraft). Personally, I like about half of Ankhesentapemkah's ideas... --------*****-------- Learn and be informed, because a Politicians worst nightmare is an informed voter... So choose your CSM Candidates wisely
Lysander Kaldenn	Posted - 2008.04.21 18:37:00 - [158] Edited by: Lysander Kaldenn on 21/04/2008 18:39:57 Originally by: Hamfast Originally by: Lysander Kaldenn Edited by: Lysander Kaldenn on 21/04/2008 18:05:39 Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Only 3 females? Noone else truly independant, as in not belonging to some powerhungry corp? Looks like I have the home-field advantage! 100% Female 100% Independant 100% Dedicated to YOU! sexy pose And if enough of us agree with her, she will be elected... nothing says she will be able to get any of her issues changed by CCP, but they will be voiced and answered (I hope)... As for your Chicken Little "The Sky is falling" fear, you have no faith in CCP if you think they will turn this into WoE (World of Evecraft). Personally, I like about half of Ankhesentapemkah's ideas... I'm not saying the sky is falling. I'm saying: Know what your voting for. Because there will be people who vote for the hell of it and have no idea what they're voting for. I know CCP probably isn't going to give in to her. I just think we shouldn't have to listen to people who don't really participate in the game whine about how it is broken. Thats like sucking at chess and claiming the game is flawed because you can't move the pieces however you want. CCP should kick people who've been in noob-corp for a year or longer into an npc corp that can be war dec'd. Thats a banner we can get behind.
Arithron	Posted - 2008.04.21 19:26:00 - [159] Edited by: Arithron on 21/04/2008 19:28:30 Interesting topics of discussion taking place, but I wonder how many players posting here have actually read the CSM summary? It clearly explains the role of the 9 elected persons- I see nothing about them suggesting their own ideas to CCP or in meetings, without them first being posted on the CSM forum for ALL players to read and discuss/comment/support. Even then, they need the backing of at least one representative or 5% public support from the eligible voting player base. Quote: 'Regardless of the support method, topics cannot be adopted by the CSM unless they have been open for community discussion for at least seven days. This includes the act of a Representative putting forth a topic, as he or she must present the topic to the voters and cannot bring it forth to the Council unless it has been up for seven days or more.' So, essentially, some ideas will be ditched due to lack of support/negative support by the PLAYERS, or if it makes it through to the CSM, it still needs to get a majority of CSM representatives to vote it to CCP council consideration. Quote: 'Upon reaching the CSM, all topics must be discussed by Representatives and voted on to determine if escalation to the CCP Council is necessary. A simple majority vote is required for passage. Topics which do not pass this vote must be accompanied with a summary explaining why.' Lets assume, as some of you seem to be worried about, an idea that may have a 'negative' impact on a percentage of the players, makes it past the CSM to be presented to the CCP council; Quote: 'The CCP Council is comprised of CCP employees selected by the CCP CEO. Their role is to resolve all topics marked for resolution by the CSM. They will attend the meeting in Iceland between the two councils and will attempt to accommodate all reasonable requests by player Representatives.' I highlight an important word in that particular part of the summary! The CCP council will then do the following; Quote: ... do everything in its power to resolve the topics presented, and short of accomplishing that, state in clear terms why a resolution is not possible; it is however necessary for the CSM to prioritize its topics should the CCP Council not be able to accommodate a reply to all topics. The CCP Council will only deny topics if they are deemed inappropriate or beyond the immediate scope of EVE. The CSM will not have an appeal option if a denial is issued, but can expect an explanation why the denial was necessary. As you can see, there are numerous checks at all stages of this process. Ideas and Topics of discussion will make it past the CCP council on MERIT of the idea, not by any nefarious means! If you think a player is standing for the CSM to push their own agenda, you have a simple, and powerful solution at your fingertips- vote for someone else! Arithron
Hamfast Gallente	Posted - 2008.04.21 20:17:00 - [160] I agree with you, but: Originally by: Arithron Edited by: Arithron on 21/04/2008 19:28:30 Interesting topics of discussion taking place, but I wonder how many players posting here have actually read the CSM summary? It clearly explains the role of the 9 elected persons- I see nothing about them suggesting their own ideas to CCP or in meetings, without them first being posted on the CSM forum for ALL players to read and discuss/comment/support. Even then, they need the backing of at least one representative or 5% public support from the eligible voting player base. Arithron We the Voters need to take into account the items that a candidate supports, a candidate that fails to inform the electorate on their views could in fact support anything (or nothing) and therefore add nothing to the CSM beyond a warm body. It is your ideas and allegiances that separate you from the rest of those running, what you are interested in, what you think can be done to help improve the game, what needs to be changed... and something you obviously figured out, the realization that you may not accomplish a blessed thing (if all the CSM's ideas are counter productive to the designs of CCP) --------*****-------- Learn and be informed, because a Politicians worst nightmare is an informed voter... So choose your CSM Candidates wisely

Daveydweeb Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.21 20:27:00 - [161] Edited by: Daveydweeb on 21/04/2008 20:29:06 Originally by: Astria Tiphareth If you were presented with a notion that might lead to fragmentation of the larger 0.0 alliances (i.e. they would split down into smaller groups) but would cause a much larger pull into low-sec and null-sec by the player base (changing from 80% empire to, say, 50%), would you be for it for the good of the EVE community at large, or feel that status quo of the 0.0 alliances took priority? I'd be skeptical of any such change, depending on exactly what form it took. Some general thoughts: - 0.0 space, with the exception of some NPC regions, represents an opportunity for players to exercise something that no other MMO has ever attempted: virtual governance over a tract of land. Not only is this a natural attraction to players that CCP shouldn't attempt to diminish, it really can't be matched in lowsec or empire. The players that, like me, get their kicks from being part of something that 'actually matters' in their politically-focused internet spaceship world, can't really get the same satisfaction in lowsec without essentially turning lowsec into nullsec. - As far as encouraging more people into lowsec goes, I don't think you're looking at it the right way. The fact that people who play in 0.0 tend to stay there isn't something that should be viewed necessarily as a bad thing: instead, if you wanted to increase the proportion of players in lowsec compared to 0.0, you'd do better to try and encourage new players into the game by pitching piracy above empire-building. Again, I don't think this is something you need a change in gameplay to achieve (although factional warfare might help a bit, when it finally comes through). - As far as the fragmentation of superpowers goes, I don't think that's something that needs attention at all, most especially in a game which values a market economy as highly as EVE Online. It's more entertaining and gives players a greater sense of control to let them handle politics entirely without changes that would reduce the size of their alliances; after all, we will never see a superpower in EVE that remains unfragmented for any significant power of time, witness any number of examples from the last few years.
Arduron	Posted - 2008.04.21 20:35:00 - [162] I just posted a thread on the general forum to introduce myself and post some general info on my views/ideals. Anyway, I realized later that I would probably be better off posting that info here. Here is the link to my main campaign blog: Arduron's Campaign Blog Here is my introduction and background: Background, Qualifications, and General Introduction And Here is a post I have made about current issues, and my views on them: Current Issues & My Views I hope that is helpful to some of you, and I look forward to serving you on the CSM. I will be doing my best to chime in on key issues over the next little while as well. Please feel free to send me questions vi PM, or email, or to reply on the blog. (I will do my best to keep up on other threads on here too if anyone directs questions at me specifically). Thanks again.
Sabrina Al'Kian	Posted - 2008.04.21 21:00:00 - [163] I'm probably going to vote for Andrew Cruse because he seems to represent my views (almost entirely). On the other side of the spectrum, I might vote Valantijn. Of course, it all depends on how many candidates are to be elected, how many votes we're allowed, and so on. I can't seem to find the rules for this election anywhere, so I remain somewhat confused.
Hamfast Gallente	Posted - 2008.04.21 21:30:00 - [164] Originally by: Sabrina Al'Kian I'm probably going to vote for Andrew Cruse because he seems to represent my views (almost entirely). On the other side of the spectrum, I might vote Valantijn. Of course, it all depends on how many candidates are to be elected, how many votes we're allowed, and so on. I can't seem to find the rules for this election anywhere, so I remain somewhat confused. 1 vote per account, highest vote count = CSM chairman, top 9 vote getters = CSM, next 5 are Alt's --------*****-------- Learn and be informed, because a Politicians worst nightmare is an informed voter... So choose your CSM Candidates wisely
Talkuth Rel Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.04.21 23:53:00 - [165] Well, it looks like I've got my work cut out for me, there's quite a few candidates to choose from. Time to filter through all the information and try to find a worthwhile candidate. I have a general thought process for elections I use to narrow down my choices to a manageable size. In case anyone else finds it useful, I'll outline the first stages of my analysis: 63 candidates to sort through (CCP says 64, but there's only 63 on their list, either one is missing or they miscounted). My first step is to filter the candidates based on their candidate statements that were posted here. These statements were often short (and apparently were supposed to be limited) and don't hold a whole lot of information, but for many people it will be their first encounter with the candidates. Most people are not going to read through 60+ websites (myself included), so I take these statements as a snapshot to either entice or discourage further investigation into a candidate. Because of the importance of this statement, a lot can be determined about a candidate based on the amount of effort they put into writing it. Their words don't have to be a master's thesis or legal brief, but there has to be some amount of effort to show that they are serious about the CSM and have given it some thought. This is why my first elimination stage I refer to as "No Information." These are the candidates who did not care enough or did not take this event seriously enough to be bothered with writing anything worthwhile or informative. This includes those who did not write anything at all, those who wrote only brief one-liners or a catch phrase with no actual substance, those who only listed a website without offering any other info, and a few who actually wrote quite a bit but managed not to really say anything (one wrote out a rather nice advertisement for the game, but didn't say anything useful about themself as a candidate). All in all, I was able to eliminate 24 candidates in this stage. Now I'm at 39 I next decided to remove the remaining two Goons from my consideration (the other four bombed out in the first step). Before anyone launches into ridiculous claims of "bigotry" and "prejudice", let me point out that there is a huge difference in discriminating based on race, sex, religion, etc. and judging somene based on choices they make, actions they take, and causes they actively choose to support. If someone aligns themself with a group whose publicly stated intentions are to destroy the game for others, it is reasonable to assume that they share the same goals. If you join a book reading club, it can be inferred that your read books. If you participate in a political rally advocating a cause, it can be assumed that you support that cause. If you join the Goons, it makes sense that you are a Goon, in every sense of the word. Sure, there can be exceptions, but the nature of the Goons is such that I choose not to take a chance on trusting a group that has clearly stated they do not have my or the game's best interests at heart. A player's corp history is just as telling about them as their post history. Down to 37 My next separation of candidates is based on whether they have any kind of platform, and then on whether or not I agreed with that platform. I was pretty lenient with this, as long as the candidate stated something about issues they considered impportant, stated a view, or even a group they intended to represent, I considered them as having a platform. Those who only listed personal qualifications, vague generalities, or clamed to "represent everyone" without giving any indication of their goals or intentions were removed. Why? I want some indication of what a candidate feels is important, so I know what issues they will be passionate enough about to see that something is done.
Talkuth Rel Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.04.21 23:54:00 - [166] There are some who say that they want representatives who have "no bias." All I can say to that is that if you truly feel that way, then you probably shouldn't bother voting in the CSM, at least not for a human being. Everyone has a bias, anyone claiming otherwise is being dishonest. I would prefer to choose someone whose opinions I know and agree with rather than someone whose ideas I know nothing about. Is this about picking someone who will champion a single cause? Of course not. It's about finding a representative who best represents me, who holds a similar point of view on the game as a whole. My best method for determinine that is to examine their stated views and goals and compare them to my own. I expect the CSM to be made up of representatives with different views, each with their own bias complementing and contrasting each other to create an overall balance, rather than some impossible group of completely impartial individuals with no opinions of their own. Frankly, I feel that someone without their own opinion is out of touch with the game and the issues that currently affect the players. I want someone who is informed about the issues and has some idea of what is important to the players. If you can't be bothered to represent player ideas now, why should I expect you to do it later? In short, I removed another 18 candidates who had no stated platform, and another two whose platforms I disagreed with, either becaus I felt the opposite about the ideas they stated or because I did not feel that their issues had merit. Down to 17 During the last phase, I also weeded out two candidates I classified as having "no clue." They either did not appear to have any idea what they were doing, or did not seem to understand the purpose or method of the CSM. I hope it's obvious why I did not consider these candidates as viable. 15 left These remaining 15 make up my pool of "potential" candidates. Does that mean I'm considering voting for each of them? No. All it means is that they made it past my first phase of screening, and have earned my time to look further into them as possible representatives. I can say right now that some of these haveportrayed themselves better than others, but I will still look into each of them until I find reason to narrow the list further. I will examine their websites and research their post history in an effort to find a candidate who I feel will best represent my views and who will have the skills to actually make a difference in mettings with teh CSM and CCP. If I haven't managed to find a single best candidate at that point, I'll have to ask specific questions of the few remaining choices until I'm satisfied. For anyone interested, my short list of potential candidates at this point: Arithron Inanna Zuni zoolkhan Ankhesentapemkah Bunyip Nofonno Dymetrie Jade Constantine Goodwin Leandro Salazar Dierdra Vaal Hardin Nickaelhoop Ma Zhiqiang Shatana Fulfairas This list is probably useless for anyone who has different opinions than myself, or is looking for something different in a candidate. But for anyone who thinks similarly, I hope you find this information somewhat useful. For those who do not evaluate with the same criteria as I do, I hope at least you have found something useful withing my methodology to help you narrow down your own candidate choices. To the candidates, I wish you all luck.
Caleese New Eden Research And Design School	Posted - 2008.04.22 06:35:00 - [167] It appears you've put a lot of thought into that list Talkuth. Somewhat akin to printing out the candidates names, taping them to a door, putting on a blindfold and hurling a dart at them to help you choose. Do you realise that out of your list of 15 candidates, I could only find 1 with more than 10 posts in the Features and Ideas forum. 3 wouldn't come up on eve search, so if I'm generous and include them, that means less than a third of your list have shown any inclination to contribute to changing this game already. This is the point I've been trying to get across in this thread. I doubt there's many people who actually know more than 2 of these candidates personally. We don't know what sort of person they are, or what they stand for. At this stage this CSM election is looking to be exactly what I hoped it wouldn't become... a popularity contest. If this is the case, we may as well scratch the whole idea now because it won't achieve a single thing. The sort of people I want to see on the CSM are those who have taken a stand, and put ideas out there already. These are the people that actually give a crap about our game. To me the CSM is about people who want to improve the game, how they choose to play it is entirely up to them. I don't RP, in fact I would feel too constrained trying to RP and don't think I would enjoy the game if I did. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't vote someone from a RP corp into the CSM if I could see they were passionate on improving this game. If all the candidates had left their corp and had their corp history hidden temporarily while this election takes place, then maybe this CSM wouldn't be a complete waste of time. I really hope it doesn't turn out that way, but the majority of people posting in this thread don't leave me with any confidence at all. ----------------- Think of someone you consider of average intelligence... now realise this. Half the worlds population is dumber than that person. How does the world survive such stupidity?
Daveydweeb Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.22 08:55:00 - [168] Edited by: Daveydweeb on 22/04/2008 09:02:37 Originally by: Talkuth Rel If someone aligns themself with a group whose publicly stated intentions are to destroy the game for others, it is reasonable to assume that they share the same goals. How do you reconcile a general statement like this with Bane's titan manifesto, or hell, with my own thread on POS logistics that I linked on the previous page of this thread? Quote: A player's corp history is just as telling about them as their post history. And yet you're taking into account the Goonswarm candidates' corp history without looking into their posting history at all. EDIT: I'm also going to go out on a limb and point out that I'm in ARSED, and don't have an SA account. Because as Gamblor would certainly agree, Ars Technica > SA. vOv
Poreuomai Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2008.04.22 10:37:00 - [169] Originally by: Caleese Do you realise that out of your list of 15 candidates, I could only find 1 with more than 10 posts in the Features and Ideas forum. 3 wouldn't come up on eve search, so if I'm generous and include them, that means less than a third of your list have shown any inclination to contribute to changing this game already. How did you do your search? If I do a 'search' for my own name in the eve forum, I get only a tiny fraction of the posts I've made.
Xenofur Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.22 10:55:00 - [170] Edited by: Xenofur on 22/04/2008 10:55:16 http://eve-search.com/search/author/Poreuomai http://eve-search.com/stats/Poreuomai Also, your statement on goons being intent on destroying the game for everyone else ignores reality. Most major PvP alliances have by default the same mission statement as well as all pirates. Aside from Bob however, they simply don't publicize that, which makes goons one of the most honest entities in this game. Please do keep in mind what kind of game this is. Secondly, the CSM has about zero decision power. Anything they suggest has to come from players and goes through CCP. A position in this council does not allow them to do anything destructive aside from taking up a seat that might perhaps be better used by someone else with more knowledge about the game.

Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.22 15:54:00 - [171] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 22/04/2008 15:54:30 Originally by: Caleese It appears you've put a lot of thought into that list Talkuth. Somewhat akin to printing out the candidates names, taping them to a door, putting on a blindfold and hurling a dart at them to help you choose. Thats an unfair statement to make Caleese. He's explained his thought process and how he reached the decision at every stage. Things like editing out the people who posted no campaign message. Or who have chosen to be utterly "neutral" with no policy preference are all accountable and traceable facts - its not random like hurling darts at a door - its his personal preference and he's explaining how he reached that position. Quote: Do you realise that out of your list of 15 candidates, I could only find 1 with more than 10 posts in the Features and Ideas forum. 3 wouldn't come up on eve search, so if I'm generous and include them, that means [b]less than a third of your list have shown any inclination to contribute to changing this game already . Thats a potentially fair point - but then again take my own example - I READ features and ideas forum, I don't often post there. Does that mean I have no inclination to contribute to changing this game - hardly. I consider myself an advocate of pretty important game changes for the benefit and enjoyment of all and thats what my own personal manifesto is about. Did I invent every new idea in my manifesto? - nope, definitely not. I'm not standing as some kind of game messiah as the font of all good knowledge. I AM standing as a person who loves Eve and can recognise good ideas when I see them. I have a sense of the big-picture and awareness of what needs changing if this great game is going to continue and become greater yet. And I have the confidence and drive to promote other people's good suggestions to the highest levels to make these things happen. I think this is any politicians job really - ensuring that the best ideas get the best support and make the best possible impact for all our interests. Quote: I doubt there's many people who actually know more than 2 of these candidates personally. We don't know what sort of person they are, or what they stand for. Well Caleese, I'd invite you to read my CSM blog and listen to the lecture I gave to Eve-uni a couple of weeks ago. That should give a pretty good idea of what you'd be getting from a vote for Jade in this election. Quote: At this stage this CSM election is looking to be exactly what I hoped it wouldn't become... a popularity contest. If this is the case, we may as well scratch the whole idea now because it won't achieve a single thing. The sort of people I want to see on the CSM are those who have taken a stand, and put ideas out there already. These are the people that actually give a crap about our game. Some of it is going to be a popularity contest because we have a number of "big-alliance" candidates standing on their own fame and peer group adulation etc etc. But others have actually provided a detailed platform and expressed a preference on key issues facing this game. If you feel strongly it shouldn't be a simple popularity contest then vote for the best advocate of the policies you personally care about regardless of alliance affiliations - its your vote, use it! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Poreuomai Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2008.04.22 16:04:00 - [172] Originally by: Xenofur Edited by: Xenofur on 22/04/2008 10:55:16 http://eve-search.com/search/author/Poreuomai http://eve-search.com/stats/Poreuomai Thanks!
Demos Colodan	Posted - 2008.04.22 16:48:00 - [173] As I can see now, as I guess I'am the "noobiest" gamer in the candidates list, my acceptation, that a candidate has to be a person, who might be able to stand in "front" of the community as a direct organ for the community facin' probs with the CCP Council without nodding off, trying to find diplomatic solutions and who feels him-/herself responsible till the end for the communitys concerning, is totally wrong. Also my described "snapshot" from the Council Candidates Informations with it's contained RL-softskills, seem to be a wrong way of thinking on my side. In fact, regarding the opinions wrote so far, a member of CSM has to be an old hand gamer, knowing the game and it's complex environment inside out. The ingame-skills seem to be the non plus ultra also the game-experience which comes along with. These four mainly "basics" let a candidate become an adequate representative who will be able to act? I have to admit: I don't achieve these points in the last preceding paragraph
Pirc Balar	Posted - 2008.04.22 17:15:00 - [174] Originally by: Demos Colodan These four mainly "basics" let a candidate become an adequate representative who will be able to act? I have to admit: I don't achieve these points in the last preceding paragraph I've been hoping you would post. Of the candidate descriptions on the list in the dev blog yours seemed to me one of the more realistic. Of course I am very new at this game and feel like most the time I have no idea what is going on. So it seems like the CSM position might be similar starting off. Though clearly some of the previous posters seem to have very clear ideas. 1. Candidate should be unbiased (this is one of the more unrealistic expectation imho) 2. Candidate should have a history of proposing game changes, fixes, and/or features (it was my understanding that the CSM's job will be to bring community concerns up for discussion). Anyhow, I'd like to hear more from you Demos even if some of the other posters might write you off. Have a blog or anything?
Demos Colodan	Posted - 2008.04.22 17:56:00 - [175] I've had a blog on my last career as alliance leader on a bg. I closed this one, after discovering more and more the world of EVE and I decided to concentrate only on EVE. Nevertheless I guess I'll be more and more active. Even if I will be wrote off, I'll observe the work of CSM intently. Currently, I see no need of managing a blog. Why? What should I write more than what I've written in the "snapshot"? What I want to achieve? What I will do? Or make up a history by interviewing myself? Perhaps I should reproduce the content of the CCP-pdf and create a "funny" poster like other candidates did. Perhaps I should write down, what I'm standing for and what my interests for EVE are, like other candidates did. However: the interest and the things a candidate stands for will not be important (thus this kinda info is useless?)! He must act for the interests of the community second to none and so it might be possible, that everything, what he announced in his election campaign turned out to be a mistake?! To be honest: I think a blog would be necessary, when the voting is done. The CSM and its members MUST manage a blog in line with the forum of the CSM to keep records of their work. Only then a constructive work over a longer period would be possible (regarding the following legislative periods). Until then I'll try to explain my postion and my appreciation of a member of CSM.
Talkuth Rel Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.04.22 20:28:00 - [176] Edited by: Talkuth Rel on 22/04/2008 20:33:02 Originally by: Caleese It appears you've put a lot of thought into that list Talkuth. Somewhat akin to printing out the candidates names, taping them to a door, putting on a blindfold and hurling a dart at them to help you choose... Once again, you either read and fail to comprehend, or you are blatantly ignoring that which is inconvenient to you. Did I ever say that these 15 were all worthy of a vote? No. These are just the candidates who have done the bare minimum in my opinion to warrant further investigation and consideration. That's it. Anyone who couldn't put forth a minimal effort is not worth my time. Any further decisions will be based on post history, ideas presented, etc. As you have seen yourself, this provides quite a bit of further narrowing of the field. For those with limited posting history, I will have to base my decision more on their current statements and the level of comprehension they demonstrate and weigh it agains those with standing histories of sound ideas and proposals. Originally by: Daveydweeb How do you reconcile a general statement like this with Bane's titan manifesto, or hell, with my own thread on POS logistics? All I can say is that you made your choice of association. You made your bed, it's time to lie in it. It's impossible to be in goonswarm and be unaware of their intentions and reputation. You have no right to be upset with anyone who judges you by the company you keep and doubts your sincerity because of it. Originally by: Xenofur Edited by: Xenofur on 22/04/2008 10:55:16 http://eve-search.com/search/author/Poreuomai http://eve-search.com/stats/Poreuomai Also, your statement on goons being intent on destroying the game for everyone else ignores reality. Most major PvP alliances have by default the same mission statement as well as all pirates. Aside from Bob however, they simply don't publicize that, which makes goons one of the most honest entities in this game. Please do keep in mind what kind of game this is. There is a huge difference between attempting to destroy other players' ships within the context of the game, and actively trying to bring down the game itself. Originally by: Xenofur Secondly, the CSM has about zero decision power. Anything they suggest has to come from players and goes through CCP. A position in this council does not allow them to do anything destructive aside from taking up a seat that might perhaps be better used by someone else with more knowledge about the game. I think people underestimate the position of a CSM candidate. No, they are not the ultimate authority on what changes are made. But they do have some power in the form of what gets brought to CCP's attention. Look it up. What is required to bring a topic before CCP? Either support from 5% of the playerbase or the support of one CSM rep. All you need is the ear of one rep, and you can have any issue brought up you choose. Anythign brought up by a CSM rep requires consideration and a response from CCP. Does this guarantee it will be implemented in the game? No, but it most certainly is a level of power that is open to some abuse. Remember that this is a game characterized by a history of people using out of game methods to achieve an in-game advantage. Managing to get into and manipulate the CSM would be the ultimate scam for some people. Why should I take a chance on trusting someone representing a group who has just such a history when there are other viable candidates without such a history who would better represent my views?
Virkuul	Posted - 2008.04.22 21:59:00 - [177] Hey guys, Just wanted to throw my hat into the ring as well. I'm running for CSM, and you can find out more info about my platform at my webpage (the one on the candidates page has errors, so I devised this new site). I know I've got some major competition, but I'm looking forward to a good race. I've seen all aspects of this game, but look to the future of Eve and the new players, since I can find out what they think by being in an NPC corp myself.
Ankhesentapemkah Gallente	Posted - 2008.04.23 07:24:00 - [178] Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 23/04/2008 07:35:36 Originally by: Breha Organa home-field advantage, eh? I see your 100%s and ADD to the list my qualifications in real life. I don't have to make a sexy pose, my actions speak for themselves. http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=752283&page=3#65 You can read my extensive list of real life qualifications here. Originally by: Lysander Kaldenn I hope you people realise that this person is questing for pvp flagging (mutual pvp) and a loss insurance for suicide gankers. I spoke at length with her in local. If you want to destroy EvE by all means listen to her. Take Care is basically a Make EvE WoW movement. Soon we will all be flying our Hacs back from the graveyard while these "independent" 4 year noob-corpers run their missions in the blessed safety of high sec. Her description says nothing about Take Care's motives. How can people who don't participate in the majority of the game (not even joining a corp, for god's sake) have a say in EvE's direction? EvE is not a single player game, it never will be. If you'd like it to be, by all means track down Elite or Privateer, or failing those Freelancer. I can only hope that having Goons on the council will protect pvp and keep this pvp flag garbage of the servers. Also (at least I hope) CCP will probably veto anything that mindless. Do you happen to be an alt of Doonoo Boonoo? Because you clearly did not listen to a word I said. And what local would that happen to be, and what character were you using at the time? If you claim that you talked to me, at least give us some means of verifying that claim. Such as: Suicide ganking in itself is FINE, but there should be more CONSEQUENCES for criminals. Lawful citizens should be to provide their own security in high-sec by implementing systems such as vigilante platforms, killright trading, and a rework of the bounty mechanics. (oh noes, this sounds an awful lot like PVP) Rewards in lowsec should be increased, so more people consider venturing there. Faction Warfare will provide more options for PVPers, it's important to gather feedback on the mechanics. Clearly you do not have a clue what you're talking about.
Demos Colodan	Posted - 2008.04.23 09:59:00 - [179] Edited by: Demos Colodan on 23/04/2008 10:00:23 Edited by: Demos Colodan on 23/04/2008 10:00:05 Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=752283&page=3#65 You can read my extensive list of real life qualifications here. After several Ingame-PM I decided to pick up my previous posters way, to deepen my "snapshot". Name: David "Dave" Challie Age: 32 Nationality: german Married: yes (two kids) Profession: Student and Regular Soldier (12 yrs) Languages: German, English, French CV summary: Education: 1997: Commercial High School (Course: Economics & Amdinistration) 2001: Trainung Administrative Officer 2006: Principal Trainer (to train the trainer) 2007-present: BA International Business Administration (Course: HRM) University of Applied Sciences, Wiesbaden Employment History: 1997-1998: Draftee (as we have conscript army over here) 1998-2002: NCO (StaffSgt, Sgt 1st Class - Group Leader of TAC-Party, Trainer for Securityguards and Deputy Platoon Leader of a Signal Platoon) 2002-2007: NCO (StaffSgt, MasterSgt - Training Supervisor Sattelite Communications and Communication Security & Encryption) Engagement: 1983-1994: Member and Group Leader of a Boy Scouts Tribe 1998-2002: Spokesman for Draftees of Heavy Armored Brigade 34 (mil.) 2002-2007: Honorary Assessor of the Deutscher Bundeswehrverband ("Labor Union" of the german soldiers) 2003-today: Chairman of the local Parents' Association of Day-Care Center 2005-2006: Assesor Parents' Association of Day-Care Centers of the Regional Capital of Wiesbaden 2007-today: Deputy Chairman of the local Parents' Association of Elementary School Hobbies: All about Communication, Business and Psychology. Painting, Zen Buddhism... but first of all my wife and my kids. Additional statement: That's why I thought, a application for CSM in my case would be accurate. I was trained to be business fluent, team-oriented communicative and ability to assert oneself (thus for others) by natural authority and objective distance. I hope I could reply the open-end questions. Now, you can write me off Best regards!
Pizi Gallente	Posted - 2008.04.23 10:18:00 - [180] i see it as plain wrong to vote for someone who is in goon (or bob or RA or whatever) your just to baised and sworn to your alliance to see the big picture imo _______________________________________________ Mining Crystal II BPC Pricelist EVEpedia[Deutsch]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.