|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
129
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 23:46:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hi CCP, while I appreciate that when all is said and done you get to set the rules, I'd appreciate if you didn't try to spin the decision to remove The Mittani from the CSM as an inevitable result of his ban. Your own whitepaper clearly states:
Quote: also, players with a serious warning22 or ban on any account in their possession can be excluded from candidate eligibility. however, in-game behavior, regardless of play style, will never be a criterion for candidacy unless the rules of the eula and/or tos are violated.
Note the use of "can" not "will" or "must". Trying to portray this decision as unavoidable rather than a choice you have made smacks of cowardice and removes any confidence I had in your promise to not regress to the bad CCP of old. |
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
130
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 23:55:00 -
[2] - Quote
Also CCP, while I have your attention, perhaps you should consider the repercussions of publically allowing the CSM to come to their own decision on this then even more publically overriding it. That doesn't look to me like the actions of a company who takes their playerbase seriously. |
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
130
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 00:37:00 -
[3] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote: The CSM reached a wrong decision. Alex Gianturco's actions were indefensible really and rather than manning up and telling him he had to go they tried to fool themselves about the scope of the damage done by Alex's drunken antics at Fanfest.
This is the problem with sycophancy in a nutshell. Last year they got so used to being beta males to the Mittani's alpha that they lost their collective backbone and the problem now is that the CSM iself is out of touch with the player base it is supposed to represent.
So you're saying that almost the entire group of player elected representatives still represent the players less that you do because...?
Is it internet space likes? |
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
131
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 01:06:00 -
[4] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote: So given the CSM was formed partially as an oversight body to look at CCPs internal proceedures and ensure t20 didn't happen again and was supposed to include players of good character and trustworthy community-centric outlook - how do you propose that kind of body could get any real respect if it was not itself held to the standards expected of the rest of the community?
If I was one of the remaining CSM members I'd sure as **** be considering resigning right now. If CCP had any intention of taking their much lauded (in both the gaming and mainstream press) player council seriously they'd have either respected the consensus they reached or told them right from the start it was out of their hands. Instead the CSM are given the illusion of legitimacy then overruled mere hours later.
That doesn't sound like the new CCP we were promised oh so recently, that sounds like the bad CCP of old who suffer from bad internal communication and schizophrenic public relations.
And that doesn't bear well for the future of Eve.
|
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
133
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 01:43:00 -
[5] - Quote
Lt Pizi wrote:Andski wrote: So CCP is reverting the CSM back to a useless PR/marketing tool rather than a player advocacy group. Cool beans.
no they just axed the one guy who broke the rule (by his own words ) and go on bussiness as usual there was no outcry when they axed the dutch girl for ?NDA?
No, they let the CSM come to consensus on the issue then overruled them when they made the "wrong" decision. For the CSM to have any legitimacy other than a PR tool CCP need to either respect their decisions or make it adequately clear a decision is not theirs to make. Not this worst of both worlds bullshit. |
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
152
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 18:03:00 -
[6] - Quote
CCP Xhagen wrote: Q1, CCP forced the resignation of the CSM Chairman. A1, As a part of the CSM bylaws, banned players are ineligible to sit on the CSM. This would have been an unfortunate side effect of CCP feeling that a temporary ban was the correct course of action in this case. However, prior to any notification to this effect, The chairman of CSM6 resigned of his own volition as he had previously announced that he would do. Since the chair resigned from CSM 6 prior to being banned and was not yet seated on CSM 7 he will be able to run for future CSMs.
Hi CCP Xhagen, which CSM bylaw are you applying in this case? The document linked from the CSM community page is this one: http://community.eveonline.com/download/devblog/CSM.pdf
In the section on candidate eligbility it states:
Quote:Also, players with a serious warning22 or ban on any account in their possession can be excluded from candidate eligibility. However, in-game behavior, regardless of play style, will never be a criterion for candidacy unless the rules of the EULA and/or TOS are violated.
This is a get out clause, not a hard and fast rule so this doesn't mandate The Mittani's exclusion from CSM6 or 7.
The section on representative conduct states:
Quote:any behavior or actions considered being a material breach of the eula or tos by a Csm representative is grounds for immediate dismissal and permanent exclusion from all pending and future participation in the council. there are no exceptions, regardless of the infraction. representatives are not only expected to uphold the social contract that all society members are held accountable to, but should also set a behavior standard for everyone else to follow.
Now this is a little ambiguous because its not clear whether "the council" refers to the current iteration of the CSM or all iterations. However, the interpretation implied by your statement is that it refers only to CSM6, in which case he should still be eligible for CSM7. If that is not the case he should be barred from all future CSMs.
If I'm referring to the wrong versions of the byelaws then please let me know, however the pdf above is linked from the CSM community page (http://community.eveonline.com/council/voting/). I'm also aware that at the end of the day you don't have to abide by these self imposed rules, however I'd appreciate if you didn't try to paint this as a decision forced upon you by them when it clearly isn't. |
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
153
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 23:00:00 -
[7] - Quote
Aruken Marr wrote:I think people need to pull themselves from up their own arses and reflect on what really matters in life...
Never stopping posting? |
|
|
|